Subject: Re: report a bug about sched_rt
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: sen wang <wangsen.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kernel@kolivas.org,
       npiggin@suse.de, arjan@infradead.org,
       linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <454c71700907240626w127fd890ufa91ef90cbcaaa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <454c71700907240357l61f5c4fajaca73db0fba7db8@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1248437670.6987.26.camel@twins>
	 <454c71700907240604h4673f117j8ed58b9f2ee54798@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1248441290.6987.52.camel@twins>
	 <454c71700907240626w127fd890ufa91ef90cbcaaa@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:33:35 +0200
Message-Id: <1248442415.6987.56.camel@twins>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 879
Lines: 21

On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 21:26 +0800, sen wang wrote:
> don't tell me what theory. don't be so doctrinairism! OK?
> If cpu is free and there is a running state task,how can you scdedule
> idle task up?
> I tell you again:we are not talking about a bandwidth of 100% for RT!
> Bug lies in the bandwidth of (100- X)%.(X<100)
> even in the time of 100-X,if there is a rt task, you should not idle()
> the system.

*sigh*

Yes we should. I appreciate that you might assume otherwise, but you're
wrong. Suppose you have two competing bandwidth groups, which one will
run over, to what purpose?

Also, your next top post will go to /dev/null.
--
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/