![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Tim Hockin wrote: >On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 06:11:49PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>I thought hotplug is allowed to fail? Thus you can have a hung system. >>Or what if the hotplug script itself becomes TASK_UNRUNNABLE? What if the >>process needs a guaranteed scheduling latency? >> > >I guess a hotplug script MAY fail. I don't think it's a good idea to make >your CPU hotplug script fail. May and Misght are different. It's up to the >implementor whether the script can get into a failure condition. > Sorry bad wording. The script may fail to be executed. > >The hotplug script can only become unrunnable if you yank out all the CPUs >on the system. I'd assume it would have an affinity of 0xffffffff. > OK I guess thats not such a valid concern > >What if <which> process needs guaranteed scheduling latency? Do we really >_guarantee_ scheduling latency *anywhere*? > > We do guarantee that a realtime task won't be blocked waiting for a hotplug script to fault in and start it up again (which may not happen). Not sure how important this issue is. - 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 14:00 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||