Open pevik opened 2 years ago
Hi, may I work on this?
@fedeb95 You're welcome.
I've submitted a patch via email hopefully correctly (I'm using protonmail which I understand isn't really patch-friendly)
Base latest email this seems hold for a while and only need some small modification. How to continue this? @metan-ucw @pevik @fedeb95 https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/patch/20221114225616.54212-1-federico.bonfiglio@protonmail.ch/
I have done some cleanup actions base v2 patch(add check base @metan-ucw 's feedback) and create v3 patch. https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/patch/20230916124919.31203-1-wegao@suse.com/ Hope this patch can close this feature request.
Sorry but I couldn't work on it and somehow missed the e-mails. Thanks for making a new version of the patch
Sorry but I couldn't work on it and somehow missed the e-mails. Thanks for making a new version of the patch
np : )
This issue can be closed since patch get merged.
Although we have basic
sched_get_priority_{max,min}()
tests,SCHED_RESET_ON_FORK
deserves it's own test to detect children created by fork(2) do not inherit privileged scheduling policies.https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/sched_setscheduler.2.html https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/sched.7.html https://lwn.net/Articles/335203/ https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/Ye615gN0Yv1%2FWskD@pevik/