lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 05/16] sched: SCHED_DEADLINE policy implementation.
From
Date
On Fri, 2012-04-06 at 09:14 +0200, Juri Lelli wrote:

> +static void replenish_dl_entity(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se)
> +{
> + struct dl_rq *dl_rq = dl_rq_of_se(dl_se);
> + struct rq *rq = rq_of_dl_rq(dl_rq);
> +
> + /*
> + * We Keep moving the deadline away until we get some

s/Keep/keep/

> + * available runtime for the entity. This ensures correct
> + * handling of situations where the runtime overrun is
> + * arbitrary large.
> + */
> + while (dl_se->runtime <= 0) {
> + dl_se->deadline += dl_se->dl_deadline;
> + dl_se->runtime += dl_se->dl_runtime;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * At this point, the deadline really should be "in
> + * the future" with respect to rq->clock. If it's
> + * not, we are, for some reason, lagging too much!
> + * Anyway, after having warn userspace abut that,
> + * we still try to keep the things running by
> + * resetting the deadline and the budget of the
> + * entity.
> + */
> + if (dl_time_before(dl_se->deadline, rq->clock)) {
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> + dl_se->deadline = rq->clock + dl_se->dl_deadline;
> + dl_se->runtime = dl_se->dl_runtime;
> + }
> +}
> +

I just finished reviewing patches 1-5, and have yet to find anything
wrong with them (except for these typos). I'll continue my review, and
then I'll start testing them.

Good work (so far ;-)

-- Steve




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-11 15:43    [W:0.550 / U:19.368 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site