Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 7 Aug 2020 16:13:46 +0200
From:   peterz@infradead.org
To:     Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc:     luca abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>, mingo@redhat.com,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tommaso.cucinotta@santannapisa.it,
        alessio.balsini@gmail.com, bristot@redhat.com,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
        mtosatti@redhat.com, williams@redhat.com,
        valentin.schneider@arm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 6/6] sched/fair: Implement starvation monitor
Message-ID: <20200807141346.GL2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200807095051.385985-1-juri.lelli@redhat.com>
 <20200807095604.GO42956@localhost.localdomain>
 <20200807152832.591f462e@nowhere>
 <20200807134353.GR42956@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200807134353.GR42956@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 03:43:53PM +0200, Juri Lelli wrote:

> Right, but I fear we won't be able to keep current behavior for wakeups:
> RT with highest prio always gets scheduled right away?

If you consider RT throttling, that's already not the case. We can
consider this fair server to be just another way to implement that.

At some point, we'll have have to preempt higher priority tasks, that's
the entire point of the thing after all.