Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> * K.R. Foley <kr@cybsft.com> wrote:
> 
>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> i have released the v2.6.20-rt1 kernel, which can be downloaded from the 
>>> usual place:
>>>
>> I have a couple of questions regarding priorities of the softirqs, IRQ 
>> handlers, etc.
>>
>> With some exceptions, back in 2.6.18 and prior patches the IRQ threads 
>> were prioritized between 50 and 25 and the most of the softirqs were 
>> prioritized at 1? In newer patches it looks like they are all 
>> prioritized at 50?
>>
>> I was just curious what went into making these choices? I am just 
>> trying to better understand these decisions.
> 
> The basically random order-of-request_irq() prioritization was causing 
> problems (it worked for some but didnt work for others), so i got rid of 
> trying to auto-guess some priority order. Also, now that we've got 
> tools/scripts like set_kthread_prio and rtprio it seemed more consistent 
> to just not attempt to prioritize interrupts and softirqs at all, but to 
> keep them all 'in the middle' of the RT priority range.
> 
> 	Ingo
> 

Thanks.

-- 
	kr
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/