On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 02:38:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> If the consumer of the data are RT tasks as well (I hadn't expected that
> from a TV capture device) then I'd propose to use FIFO-50 as default.
>
> The thing is, the moment you're doing actual proper RT, the admin needs
> to configure things anyway, which then very much includes setting the
> priority of interrupt threads and the like.
>
> (that is exacty why pretty much everything defaults to FIFO-50)
Is the below acceptible?
---
Subject: media/ivtv: Reduce default FIFO priority
From: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
Date: Thu Aug 1 12:56:40 CEST 2019
The ivtv driver creates a FIFO-99 thread by default, reduce this to
FIFO-50.
FIFO-99 is the very highest priority available to SCHED_FIFO and
it not a suitable default; it would indicate the ivtv work is the
most important work on the machine.
Cc: Andy Walls <awa...@md.metrocast.net>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-me...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <pet...@infradead.org>
---
drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtv-driver.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtv-driver.c
+++ b/drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtv-driver.c
@@ -738,7 +738,7 @@ static void ivtv_process_options(struct
*/
static int ivtv_init_struct1(struct ivtv *itv)
{
- struct sched_param param = { .sched_priority = 99 };
+ struct sched_param param = { .sched_priority = MAX_RT_PRIO / 2 };
itv->base_addr = pci_resource_start(itv->pdev, 0);
itv->enc_mbox.max_mbox = 2; /* the encoder has 3 mailboxes (0-2) */
