On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 20:30:04 +0800 Xunlei Pang <xp...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Image this deadline task was preempted after running 0.1ms by another one > with an > earlier absolute deadline for 1.9ms, after scheduled back it will have the > same status > (1.9ms remaining runtime, 2ms remaining deadline) under the current > implementation. > > I can hardly figure out the difference, why is wake-up(will check > dl_entity_overflow()) > so special? The difference between a wake-up and being preempted is that one is voluntarily done by the application, the other is done by the scheduler. The preemption done by the schedule must very well be in line with the algorithms of the scheduler. But for cases where the task voluntarily sleeps and then wakes up at some arbitrary time, the scheduler has no idea what its intent was. Not to mention, it must still guarantee the bandwidth for other tasks. -- Steve
