On 06/05/24 16:07, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote: > On 6/5/24 15:24, Qais Yousef wrote: > >>> But rt is a shortened version of realtime, and so it is making *it less* > >>> clear that we also have DL here. > >> Can SCHED_DL be considered a real-time scheduling class as in opposite > >> to SCHED_BATCH for instance? Due to its requirements it fits for a real > >> time scheduling class, right? > >> And RT (as in real time) already includes SCHED_RR and SCHED_FIFO. > > Yeah I think the usage of realtime to cover both makes sense. I followed your > > precedence with task_is_realtime(). > > > > Anyway. If people really find this confusing, what would make sense is to split > > them and ask users to call rt_task() and dl_task() explicitly without this > > wrapper. I personally like it better with the wrapper. But happy to follow the > > crowd. > > For me, doing dl_ things it is better to keep them separate, so I can > easily search for dl_ specific checks. > > rt_or_dl_task(p); I posted a new version with this suggestion as the top patch so that it can be shredded more :-) Thanks for having a look. Cheers -- Qais Yousef
