lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUG] cpu-hotplug: Can't offline the CPU with naughty realtime processes
At Tue, 08 May 2007 13:02:25 +1000,
Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 11:41 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
> > At Mon, 07 May 2007 23:42:53 +1000,
> > Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > I look forward to your patch!
> > > Rusty.
> >
> > Thanks, I'll do. Maybe this work will take several days including test.
>
> Excellent.
>
> > BTW, how should I manage rt process having max priority as Gautham said?
> > He said that it's OK unless such kernel thread exists. However, currently
> > MAX_USER_RT_PRIORITY is equal to MAX_RT_PRIO, so user process also be able
> > to cause this problem. Is Srivatsa's idea 2 acceptable? Or just apply
> > "Shouldn't abuse highest rt proority" rule?
>
> We used to be able to create kernel threads higher than any userspace
> priority. If this is no longer true, I think that's OK: equal priority
> still means we'll get scheduled, right?

IF SCHED_RR, yes. However, if SCHED_FIFO, no. Such process doen't have timeslice
and only relinquish CPU time voluntarily.

# Hence this problem is complicated ;-(

Thanks,

Satoru
-
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: 2007-05-08 05:33    [W:1.466 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site