On 21/04/15 00:02, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 06:59:02AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> Hi Juri,
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 11:27:22AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 06/04/2015 09:53, Wanpeng Li wrote:
pull_dl_task can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock, this means a sto
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 06:59:02AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>Hi Juri,
>On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 11:27:22AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>On 06/04/2015 09:53, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> pull_dl_task can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock, this means a stop task
>>> can slip in, in which case we need to
Hi Juri,
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 11:27:22AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 06/04/2015 09:53, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> pull_dl_task can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock, this means a stop task
>> can slip in, in which case we need to reschedule. This patch add the
>> reschedule when the scenario oc
Hi,
On 06/04/2015 09:53, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> pull_dl_task can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock, this means a stop task
> can slip in, in which case we need to reschedule. This patch add the
> reschedule when the scenario occurs.
>
Ok, I guess it can happen. Doesn't RT have the same problem? It s
pull_dl_task can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock, this means a stop task
can slip in, in which case we need to reschedule. This patch add the
reschedule when the scenario occurs.
Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li
---
kernel/sched/deadline.c | 16 +++-
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 del
5 matches
Mail list logo