![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
> > The problem is that if I implement this, and set scheduling to be >SCHED_RR, > > or SCHED_FIFO, my linux machine hangs. With SCHED_OTHER, I don't have >that > > (note that for testing I used to set all prios to minimum (=1)). > >The big difference is that if a tread running as SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO >never >sleeps normal treads (like X, sh, login, ...) will not be given ANY CPU >time >- computer will appear hanged. Yep, I checked all threads. Not all threads have sleeps, but they do use semaphores or some blocking OS calls. Are you saying that's not enough? I think it should be, else the threads have design flaws. >[BTW you are not running the same code in both cases due to ifdefs...] Yep, IMHO you don't have to set the schedule type in "OTHER" mode. >But it is possible to get out of this situation if you prepared for it >before... Use a higher priority monitor to detect looping RT processes and >reduce their priorities! I like that Idea, it would be really appreciated if you could give me some sample code, just to get me started. Thanks a lot, Gert-Jan _________________________________________________________________ MSN Search, for accurate results! http://search.msn.nl - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||