Quick question $customer stumbled over: Shouldn't the user space part of
rt_task_set_priority also (or rather?) adjust the Linux priority of the
caller? My impression is yes. Actually, translating the native priority
to sched_setscheduler parameters and calling that service would be
better, no?
Ja
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Quick question $customer stumbled over: Shouldn't the user space part of
> rt_task_set_priority also (or rather?) adjust the Linux priority of the
> caller? My impression is yes. Actually, translating the native priority
> to sched_setscheduler parameters and calling that servic
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Quick question $customer stumbled over: Shouldn't the user space part of
>> rt_task_set_priority also (or rather?) adjust the Linux priority of the
>> caller? My impression is yes. Actually, translating the native priority
>> to sched_setscheduler
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Quick question $customer stumbled over: Shouldn't the user space part of
>> rt_task_set_priority also (or rather?) adjust the Linux priority of the
>> caller? My impression is yes. Actually, translating the native priority
>> to sched_setscheduler
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Quick question $customer stumbled over: Shouldn't the user space part of
>>> rt_task_set_priority also (or rather?) adjust the Linux priority of the
>>> caller? My impression is yes. Actually, translating the native priority
>
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Quick question $customer stumbled over: Shouldn't the user space part of
>> rt_task_set_priority also (or rather?) adjust the Linux priority of the
>> caller? My impression is yes. Actually, translating the native priority
>> to sched_setscheduler
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> AFAIC, I don't see how changing priorities on the fly within a time critical
> section could be considered as good programming practice; this would tend to
> indicate that somebody is playing with priorities to paper over an application
> design issue.
So, you mean PIP pape
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
Quick question $customer stumbled over: Shouldn't the user space part of
rt_task_set_priority also (or rather?) adjust the Linux priority of the
caller? My impression is yes. Actually
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>> AFAIC, I don't see how changing priorities on the fly within a time critical
>> section could be considered as good programming practice; this would tend to
>> indicate that somebody is playing with priorities to paper over an
>> application
>
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>>> AFAIC, I don't see how changing priorities on the fly within a time critical
>>> section could be considered as good programming practice; this would tend to
>>> indicate that somebody is playing with priorities to paper o
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Quick question $customer stumbled over: Shouldn't the user space part of
> rt_task_set_priority also (or rather?) adjust the Linux priority of the
> caller? My i
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> So we should warn the user (in the doc) that rt_task_set_priority will
>> leave an inconsistent priority distribution between Linux and Xenomai
>> behind? But what is that propagation path in xnpod_renice_thread_inner
>> good for then?
>>
>
> A failed a
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>> AFAIC, I don't see how changing priorities on the fly within a time critical
>> section could be considered as good programming practice; this would tend to
>> indicate that somebody is playing with priorities to paper over an
>> application
>
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> So we should warn the user (in the doc) that rt_task_set_priority will
>>> leave an inconsistent priority distribution between Linux and Xenomai
>>> behind? But what is that propagation path in xnpod_renice_thread_inner
>>
14 matches
Mail list logo
