* Brian Silverman wrote:
> Here's my test code. Compile with `gcc -pthread -lrt test_pi.c`. It
> requires permission to set a realtime scheduling policy of 2 when
> running.
Mind sending a patch that sticks this testcase into
tools/testing/selftests/sched/ or so, with the new 'sched' directo
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
wrote:
> From what I can tell not beeing a sched guy is that the patch looks
> reasonable since the timeout gets only set to zero on enqueue_task_rt().
> Is there something special you do to trigger this?
I posted some test code with two
* Austin Schuh | 2015-03-05 09:10:47 [-0800]:
>ping?
Why is this a ping? I haven't seen this in my rt nor in my lkml inbox.
Please repost it properly including lkml.
>From what I can tell not beeing a sched guy is that the patch looks
reasonable since the timeout gets only set to zero on enqueue_
ping?
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:23 PM, wrote:
> From: Brian Silverman
>
> When non-realtime tasks get priority-inheritance boosted to a realtime
> scheduling class, RLIMIT_RTTIME starts to apply to them. However, the
> counter used for checking this (the same one used for SCHED_RR
> timeslices)
Here's my test code. Compile with `gcc -pthread -lrt test_pi.c`. It
requires permission to set a realtime scheduling policy of 2 when
running.
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
static const struct timespec kSle
From: Brian Silverman
When non-realtime tasks get priority-inheritance boosted to a realtime
scheduling class, RLIMIT_RTTIME starts to apply to them. However, the
counter used for checking this (the same one used for SCHED_RR
timeslices) was not getting reset. This meant that tasks running with a
6 matches
Mail list logo
