On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:57:46 +0200 Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 6/4/24 16:42, Qais Yousef wrote: > > - (wakeup_rt && !dl_task(p) && !rt_task(p)) || > > + (wakeup_rt && !realtime_task(p)) || > > I do not like bikeshedding, and no hard feelings... > > But rt is a shortened version of realtime, and so it is making *it less* > clear that we also have DL here. > > I know we can always read the comments, but we can do without changes > as well... > > I would suggest finding the plural version for realtime_task()... so > we know it is not about the "rt" scheduler, but rt and dl schedulers. priority_task() ? Or should we go with royal purple and call it "royalty_task()" ? ;-) -- Steve
