On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 7:10 PM, David Sommerseth <davids@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/03/10 21:48, Carsten Emde wrote: >> - if (priority > 0) >> + if (priority > 1 && !sameprio) >> priority--; > > Unless I'm missing something really obvious, shouldn't this one state: > > if (priority > 0 && !sameprio) > priority--; > > Or else 1 will be the lowest priority. It's a similar situation in > "[PATCH 1/2] add-smp-option-to-ptsematest.patch" as well. > > > kind regards, > > David Sommerseth Carsten is the owner of this code, he may very will have intended that 1 be the lowest priority, so I didn't want to second guess him. Carsten, is it useful to have SCHED_OTHER for this test? Thanks -- 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
