Re: SCHED_RR is broken + patch

• Next message: François romieu: "[PATCH] 2.3.99pre6-6 cosmetic replacement for init_timer...add_timer"
• Previous message: Dunlap, Randy: "SMP vs. UP modules"
• Next in thread: Borislav Deianov: "Re: SCHED_RR is broken + patch"
• Reply: Borislav Deianov: "Re: SCHED_RR is broken + patch"
• Reply: Artur Skawina: "Re: SCHED_RR is broken + patch"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Borislav Deianov <borislav@lix.polytechnique.fr> writes:

> sched_yield doesn't always yield for SCHED_OTHER threads

Processes should yield only to higher or equal priority processes. A
SCHED_OTHER thread executing sched_yield doesn't have to yield just because
there may be other SCHED_OTHER processes available.

> counter for SCHED_FIFO threads is never reset

It should not expire in the first place. SCHED_FIFO processes do not have
slices.

-- 
Dimitris Michailidis                    dimitris@engr.sgi.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: François romieu: "[PATCH] 2.3.99pre6-6 cosmetic replacement for init_timer...add_timer"
• Previous message: Dunlap, Randy: "SMP vs. UP modules"
• Next in thread: Borislav Deianov: "Re: SCHED_RR is broken + patch"
• Reply: Borislav Deianov: "Re: SCHED_RR is broken + patch"
• Reply: Artur Skawina: "Re: SCHED_RR is broken + patch"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:00:10 EST