Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RT] possible bug in trace_start_sched_wakeup | From | Steven Rostedt <> | Date | Fri, 27 Jan 2006 07:46:18 -0500 |
| |
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 10:46 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > spin_lock(&sch.trace_lock); > > - if (sch.task && (sch.task->prio >= p->prio)) > > + if (sch.task && ((sch.task->prio <= p->prio) || !rt_task(p))) > > goto out_unlock; > > good catch - but i'd not do the !rt_task(p) condition, because e.g. PI > related priority boosting works _without_ changing p->policy. So it is > p->prio that controls. I.e. a simple "sch.task->prio <= p->prio" should > be enough.
Ah, I don't know what I was thinking about the rt_task part (I was working on very little sleep). You're right. Nuke it!
Thanks,
-- Steve
- 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/
| |