Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933010AbWLSV12 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Dec 2006 16:27:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933017AbWLSV12 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Dec 2006 16:27:28 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:55830 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933010AbWLSV11 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Dec 2006 16:27:27 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 22:24:27 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: linux@bohmer.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Clark Williams Subject: Re: [BUG+PATCH] RT-Preempt: IRQ threads running at prio 0 SCHED_OTHER Message-ID: <20061219212427.GA11516@elte.hu> References: <3efb10970612191252m33e7b88cydca7fb488251ee35@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3efb10970612191252m33e7b88cydca7fb488251ee35@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.6 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.6 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1546 Lines: 37 * Remy Bohmer wrote: > Hello Ingo, > > I am using your yum-distributed kernel 2.6.19.1-rt15, and > unfortunately I experienced very worse latencies. It turned out that > ALL the IRQ threads were all running at prio 0, SCHED_OTHER. > > Looking at the current code in kernel/irq/manage.c, the goal was to > put them at MAX_RT_PRIO, but the call to sys_sched_setscheduler() > fails with EINVAL. I have attached a patch to set them to > (MAX_RT_PRIO-1). This works. oops - my intention was to set all IRQs and softirqs to SCHED_FIFO prio 50. I have fixed that now in my tree. prio 99 is pretty extensive and makes it hard to move tasks 'above' hardirq priority, without setting the priority of /every/ IRQ thread. So i picked SCHED_FIFO:50 - at exact half way. > Further I believe that each application of the RT-kernel requires a > different configuration of these thread-priorities and I prefer to > reconfigure these prios from userland during boot. As these > threadnames contain whitespaces in its name, they make the > shell-scripts unnecessary complex that I use to reconfigure the thread > priorities. ok - lets try it. Clark: does this impact the set_kthread_prio utility? I've changed "IRQ 123" to "IRQ-123" to make pidof & friends work better. Ingo - 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/