Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

[Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>]

On 05/15/24 07:20, Phil Auld wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 10:32:38AM +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:58:51PM -0400, Phil Auld wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Qais,
> > > 
> > > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 12:41:12AM +0100 Qais Yousef wrote:
> > > > rt_task() checks if a task has RT priority. But depends on your
> > > > dictionary, this could mean it belongs to RT class, or is a 'realtime'
> > > > task, which includes RT and DL classes.
> > > > 
> > > > Since this has caused some confusion already on discussion [1], it
> > > > seemed a clean up is due.
> > > > 
> > > > I define the usage of rt_task() to be tasks that belong to RT class.
> > > > Make sure that it returns true only for RT class and audit the users and
> > > > replace them with the new realtime_task() which returns true for RT and
> > > > DL classes - the old behavior. Introduce similar realtime_prio() to
> > > > create similar distinction to rt_prio() and update the users.
> > > 
> > > I think making the difference clear is good. However, I think rt_task() is
> > > a better name. We have dl_task() still.  And rt tasks are things managed
> > > by rt.c, basically. Not realtime.c :)  I know that doesn't work for deadline.c
> > > and dl_ but this change would be the reverse of that pattern.
> > 
> > It's going to be a mess either way around, but I think rt_task() and
> > dl_task() being distinct is more sensible than the current overlap.
> >
> 
> Yes, indeed.
> 
> My point was just to call it rt_task() still. 

It is called rt_task() still. I just added a new realtime_task() to return true
for RT and DL. rt_task() will return true only for RT now.

How do you see this should be done instead? I'm not seeing the problem.