Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: Bug in scheduler when using rt_mutex | | From | Mike Galbraith <> | | Date | Thu, 20 Jan 2011 07:12:18 +0100 |
| |
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 13:30 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote: > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote: > > or the task is enqueued > > at it's last offset as usual for runnable tasks. > > But shouldn't we task the tasks as WAKEUP, through the task has been > waked on other sched_class?
We don't need to play any games with it afaiks, just normalize it, and the rest is taken care of automatically.
> IOW, I wonder if we should play with place_entity() at some point.
If the task returns as a sleeper, place entity() will be called when it is awakened, so it's sleep credit will be clipped as usual. So vruntime can be much less than min_vruntime at class exit time, and it doesn't matter, clipping on wakeup after re-entry takes care of it.. if that's what you were thinking about.
-Mike
|  |