Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751417Ab0GKGP7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jul 2010 02:15:59 -0400 Received: from fafnir.cs.unc.edu ([152.2.129.90]:44602 "EHLO fafnir.cs.unc.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750873Ab0GKGP6 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jul 2010 02:15:58 -0400 Subject: Re: periods and deadlines in SCHED_DEADLINE Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Bjoern Brandenburg In-Reply-To: <1278748227.4390.26.camel@Palantir> Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 08:15:23 +0200 Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel , Song Yuan , Dmitry Adamushko , Thomas Gleixner , Nicola Manica , Luca Abeni , Claudio Scordino , Harald Gustafsson , bastoni@cs.unc.edu, Giuseppe Lipari Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Message-Id: <2E44C782-B72E-41FE-A6C8-68800218FE40@email.unc.edu> References: <1278682707.6083.227.camel@Palantir> <1278685951.1900.215.camel@laptop> <1278748227.4390.26.camel@Palantir> To: Raistlin X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1534 Lines: 35 On Jul 10, 2010, at 9:50 AM, Raistlin wrote: >> >> What are the exact semantics of this extra proposed syscall? >> > Right now, it is: > task_wait_interval(t) --> "wake me up at the first instant after t when > you can give me my full runtime" > >> What exactly are the benefits over not having it, and simply rely on the >> task to not wake up more often, but if it does have it run into the lack >> of budget and sort it that way? >> > What you're saying obviously will always work, and it is actually a > quite common usage pattern (we use it like that a lot! :-)). > > The new syscall might help when it is important for a task to > synchronize with the budget provisioning mechanism. It might be > uncommon, but there could be situations --more in hard than in soft > scenarios-- where you want to be sure that you're next job (and all the > subsequent ones, if you behave well) will get its full runtime, even if > this means waiting a little bit. Isn't this basically sched_yield? Don't run me now, give lower-priority work a chance to complete, let me run again when my budget is replenished. Otherwise, what are the semantics of sched_yield under EDF? Cycle through equal-deadline jobs? Given sporadic task activations, this is probably not very useful. - Bj?rn -- 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/