On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 09:42:59AM +0800, Nam Cao wrote:
Chao Liu [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
quoted
+static void handle_sched_waking(void *data, struct task_struct *task)
+{
+ if (in_task()) {
+ if (current->prio > task->prio)
+ ltl_atom_pulse(task, LTL_WOKEN_BY_LOWER_PRIO, true);
The implementation also reports wakeups from softirq context through
WOKEN_BY_SOFTIRQ:
quoted
+ } else if (in_serving_softirq()) {
+ ltl_atom_pulse(task, LTL_WOKEN_BY_SOFTIRQ, true);
+ }
Should this description mention softirq wakeups as well?
Technically, on RT kernel, softirq is a SCHED_OTHER task. On !RT kernel,
softirq can also be executed as a SCHED_OTHER task, which is the cause
for concern.
But explicitly mentioning softirq does not hurt, I wouldn't oppose that.
Thanks for the clarification. I understand it better now.
Thanks,
Chao
Nam