On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 00:18 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 08/01, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 22:12 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > > And I personally think it is not very useful, even if it was correct. > > > You can create your own workqueue and change the priority of cwq->thread. > > > > This change is more dynamic than than just setting a single priority .. > > There was some other work going on around this, so it's not totally > > clear what the benefits are .. > > Yes, I see. But still I think the whole idea is broken, not just the > implementation. It's translating priorities through the work queues, which doesn't seem to happen with the current implementation. A high priority, say SCHED_FIFO priority 99, task may have to wait for a nice -5 work queue to finish.. You can set the priority of your work queue, but you never know what the priority of the tasks are that use the work queue .. > What about delayed_work? insert_work() will use ->normal_prio of > the random interrupted process, while queue_work() uses current. Actually it would be the priority of the timer softirq .. I think what is desired here would be saving the priority of the task calling delayed_work then using that.. > What if a niced thread queues the work? This work may have no chance > to run if workqueue is actively used. Yes , if it actively used by higher priority threads .. We could restrict it to SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR tho .. > > As the topic suggests , it's a Real Time kernel .. I can give you a link > > where to download it if you want. > > Ok, thanks, I'll take a look. Still, we can't use raw_smp_processor_id() > unless we disabled cpu-hotplug. I didn't touch this particular piece of code, but I'm assuming the raw_smp_processor_id() is safe giving the rest of the code in -rt .. Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
