* Hiroshi Shimamoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> >>> Hi Ingo,
> >>>
> >>> I found an issue about the scheduler.
> >>> If you need a test case, please let me know.
> >>> Here is a patch.
> >>> [ ... ]
> >>> The new thread should be valid scheduler class before queuing.
>
Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
>>> Hi Ingo,
>>>
>>> I found an issue about the scheduler.
>>> If you need a test case, please let me know.
>>> Here is a patch.
>>> [ ... ]
>>> The new thread should be valid scheduler class before queuing.
>>> This patch fixes to set the suitable scheduler class.
>> Nice f
> > Hi Ingo,
> >
> > I found an issue about the scheduler.
> > If you need a test case, please let me know.
> > Here is a patch.
> > [ ... ]
> > The new thread should be valid scheduler class before queuing.
> > This patch fixes to set the suitable scheduler class.
>
> Nice fix! It's a 2.6.23 mus
* Hiroshi Shimamoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Ingo,
>
> I found an issue about the scheduler.
> If you need a test case, please let me know.
> Here is a patch.
>
> When using rt_mutex, a NULL pointer dereference is occurred at
> enqueue_task_rt. Here is a scenario;
> 1) there are two thre
Hi Ingo,
I found an issue about the scheduler.
If you need a test case, please let me know.
Here is a patch.
When using rt_mutex, a NULL pointer dereference is occurred at
enqueue_task_rt. Here is a scenario;
1) there are two threads, the thread A is fair_sched_class and
thread B is rt_sched_c
5 matches
Mail list logo