From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 235FE1442F4 for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2025 16:29:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749486555; cv=none; b=D+YR7iRryZm49NWrQAhzrfVI8sTQKAaUkxIRsjJ4ZLky730fQ6mChu44jTNTnXeZLfl7OTwY6lqgMRKUBtXzvDjw/YU2XEz2kM6sjdXE7RG/NXZhke6WHJ9vLjhNVQAdVQzWHN/vNnpDmmasDYUhuFhN+pDO8RuHng5BLOtfmAQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749486555; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/WIK+Zu5FCGDxkkG1lsiJBU0oVY383XAcjU5SWOwYcs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=uMHa9MNtEuoBoDM9nu6tGOQ6WJZddrGMpNIAG7nTBShM3FYIf2jleMGdF62XxUekct1YRSVnePQjMANNkehE5FpBhbQE6vM1Dbc5pqGXx/wb48idb7HeyNALD3oEISEQRFMQkxMqRoJYrhiu0MJbniqZI+thFgQ0U1PMnmvZkkc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=EF29yWKH; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="EF29yWKH" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7BE83C4CEEB; Mon, 9 Jun 2025 16:29:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1749486554; bh=/WIK+Zu5FCGDxkkG1lsiJBU0oVY383XAcjU5SWOwYcs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=EF29yWKH+jAhy1Po6wgH168ShjzMjameCB+oH1oOGd9v/b3FBDa5RuwyRhXa9bEAk +diAh2VmtK+VEiXsq/Uhc+f4ndWsHxY/kc9IoBu3wTXuWKpLo+Ax153UgYWrdDd6TS JVLWF4lV3UZS8qoOlodvMoptpLj5eEen/d3xfZLfaJF+VUNImnrooT9lmfwl2l50mn PefXjAvyoPLtMRo0Bcn0cCl6cBj93ZGnzYyiPlewzhDHC+YWxXGPqU0eiY+JawHtO1 PMk2rN5UdhioxGYbvMrjGHpTBAen9ffLhDHrztRtsiKSw3E2v9lX3gedxml9vfjMqY EAo+wbB5sCNEw== Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 06:29:13 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Andrea Righi Cc: David Vernet , Changwoo Min , Jonathan Corbet , Emily Soto , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched_ext: Documentation: Clarify time slice handling in task lifecycle Message-ID: References: <20250609162342.18790-1-arighi@nvidia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250609162342.18790-1-arighi@nvidia.com> On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 06:23:42PM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote: > It is not always obvious how a task's time slice can be refilled, either > explicitly from ops.dispatch() or automatically by the sched_ext core, > to skip subsequent ops.enqueue() and ops.dispatch() calls. This > typically happens when the task is the only one running on a CPU. > > To make this behavior easier to understand, update the task lifecycle > diagram to explicitly document how time slice handling works in such > cases. > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi Applied to sched_ext/for-6.17. Thanks. -- tejun