Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-180192-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 18:12:24 +0100
From: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
To: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()
Message-ID: <20240515171224.wbjlke6uavhig2dl@airbuntu>
References: <20240514234112.792989-1-qyousef@layalina.io>
 <20240514235851.GA6845@lorien.usersys.redhat.com>
 <20240515083238.GA40213@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20240515112050.GA25724@lorien.usersys.redhat.com>
 <20240515120613.m6ajyxyyxhat7eb5@airbuntu>
 <20240515125049.GA29065@lorien.usersys.redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240515125049.GA29065@lorien.usersys.redhat.com>

On 05/15/24 08:50, Phil Auld wrote:

> > > My point was just to call it rt_task() still. 
> > 
> > It is called rt_task() still. I just added a new realtime_task() to return true
> > for RT and DL. rt_task() will return true only for RT now.
> > 
> > How do you see this should be done instead? I'm not seeing the problem.
> >
> 
> Right, sorry. I misread your commit message completely and then all the
> places where you changed rt_task() to realtime_task() fit my misreading.
> 
> rt_task() means rt class and realtime_task does what rt_task() used to do.
> That's how I would do it, too :)

Ah, I see. I updated the commit message to hopefully read better :)

"""
    I define the usage of rt_task() to be tasks that belong to RT class.
    Make sure that it returns true only for RT class and audit the users and
    replace the ones required the old behavior with the new realtime_task()
    which returns true for RT and DL classes. Introduce similar
    realtime_prio() to create similar distinction to rt_prio() and update
    the users that required the old behavior to use the new function.
"""

> Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>

Thanks for having a look!

Cheers

--
Qais Yousef