[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Bug in scheduler when using rt_mutex
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Mike Galbraith <> wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 15:06 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Mike Galbraith <> wrote:
>> > 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.
>> For a sleep task which stay in sched_fair before it's waked:
>> try_to_wake_up()
>>   ttwu_activate()
>>     activate_task()
>>       enqueue_task_fair()
>>         enqueue_entity()
>>           place_entity()        <== clip vruntime
>> For a sleep task which promote to sched_rt when it's sleep:
>> rt_mutex_setprio()
>>   check_class_changed()
>>     switch_from_fair()       <== vruntime -= min_vruntime
>>       try_to_wake_up()
>> then stay on rq
>>         rt_mutex_setprio()
>>           enqueue_task_fair()     <==vruntime += min_vruntime
>> The difference is that in the second case, place_entity() is not
>> called, but wrt sched_fair, the task is a WAKEUP task.
>> Then we place this task in sched_fair before where it should be.
> D'oh.  You're right, he needs to be clipped before he leaves.

Exactly we should clip it when it comes back, because it still could
sleep for some time after it leaves ;)


Only stand for myself
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-20 10:09    [W:0.090 / U:1.788 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site