Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262091AbVAVAbU (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jan 2005 19:31:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262628AbVAVAay (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jan 2005 19:30:54 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.176]:35523 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262636AbVAVA2m (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jan 2005 19:28:42 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH]sched: Isochronous class v2 for unprivileged soft rt scheduling From: utz lehmann To: Con Kolivas Cc: LKML , Ingo Molnar , rlrevell@joe-job.com, paul@linuxaudiosystems.com, joq@io.com, CK Kernel , Andrew Morton , alexn@dsv.su.se In-Reply-To: <41F194DC.40603@kolivas.org> References: <41EEE1B1.9080909@kolivas.org> <1106350245.4442.5.camel@segv.aura.of.mankind> <41F194DC.40603@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 01:28:35 +0100 Message-Id: <1106353715.4442.20.camel@segv.aura.of.mankind> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de auth:5a3828f1c4d839cf12e8a3b808f7ed34 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1624 Lines: 51 On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 10:48 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote: > utz lehmann wrote: > > Hi > > > > I dislike the behavior of the SCHED_ISO patch that iso tasks are > > degraded to SCHED_NORMAL if they exceed the limit. > > IMHO it's better to throttle them at the iso_cpu limit. > > > > I have modified Con's iso2 patch to do this. If iso_cpu > 50 iso tasks > > only get stalled for 1 tick (1ms on x86). > > Some tasks are so cache intensive they would make almost no forward > progress running for only 1ms. Ok. The throttle duration can be exceed. What is a good value? 5ms, 10ms? > > > Fortunately there is a currently unused task prio (MAX_RT_PRIO-1) [1]. I > > Your implementation is not correct. The "prio" field of real time tasks > is determined by MAX_RT_PRIO-1-rt_priority. Therefore you're limiting > the best real time priority, not the other way around. Really? The task prios are (lower value is higher priority): 0 .. For SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR (rt_priority 99..1) 98 MAX_RT_PRIO-2 99 MAX_RT_PRIO-1 ISO_PRIO (rt_priority 0) 100 MAX_RT_PRIO .. For SCHED_NORMAL 139 MAX_PRIO-1 ISO_PRIO is between the SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR and the SCHED_NORMAL range. > > Throttling them for only 1ms will make it very easy to starve the system > with 1 or more short running (<1ms) SCHED_NORMAL tasks running. Lower > priority tasks will never run. > > Cheers, > Con - 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/