Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265859AbTFSRaS (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:30:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265860AbTFSRaS (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:30:18 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:22774 "EHLO hermes.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265859AbTFSRaQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:30:16 -0400 Subject: RE: O(1) scheduler seems to lock up on sched_FIFO and sched_RR ta sks From: Robert Love To: "Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" Cc: "'Ingo Molnar'" , "'Andrew Morton'" , "'george anzinger'" , "'joe.korty@ccur.com'" , "'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" , "Li, Adam" In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1056044580.8770.34.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.0 (1.4.0-2) Date: 19 Jun 2003 10:43:01 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 883 Lines: 23 On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 23:52, Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky wrote: > Then some output would show on my serial console when events/0 is > reprioritized... > > OTOH, what do you think of Robert's idea of adding 20 levels of > priorities for the kernel's sole use? That was your idea, I just said the infrastructure was in place and we could do it ;-) I am not so sure it is ideal. I hesitate to make kernel threads FIFO at a maximum priority, let alone an even greater one. I would really prefer to find a nicer solution. Anyhow, if we make events FIFO/99 that would also solve the problem, without dipping into extra high levels. Robert Love - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/