1 Dec
2003
1 Dec
'03
10:46 a.m.
At 29 Nov 2003 22:03:09 -0600,
Jack O'Quin wrote:
Roger Larsson <roger.larsson(a)norran.net> writes:
No. It's rather difficult to prove. There's no "smoking gun".
But, I have no reason to believe that it works correctly, and I
suspect that it probably does not.
as Roger pointed, the O(1) scheduler does quite simple tasks for RT
processes. it *should* work. if it deson't work, it's a bug in the
calculation of priority or so.
anyway, it's nice for debugging, if you can reproduce it...
Takashi
That's right. But, Paul and I have been working closely with this and
don't have much faith in the correctness of the 2.4 scheduler.
Have you told kernel developers about this?
This can be rather critical in embedded systems.