Re: [PATCH 1/5] xen/sched: rtds: add global-EDF utilization admission control

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 14.09.2026 12:34, Furkan Çalışkan wrote:
> 
> On 9/14/26 12:45, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 14.09.2026 11:33, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>> On 14.09.26 11:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 14.09.2026 11:10, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>>>> On 26.08.26 06:57, Furkan Caliskan wrote:
>>>>>> @@ -892,8 +983,19 @@ rt_alloc_udata(const struct scheduler *ops, struct 
>>>>>> sched_unit *unit, void *dd)
>>>>>>    static void cf_check
>>>>>>    rt_free_udata(const struct scheduler *ops, void *priv)
>>>>>>    {
>>>>>> +    struct rt_private *prv = rt_priv(ops);
>>>>>>        struct rt_unit *svc = priv;
>>>>>>    
>>>>>> +    if ( svc && !is_idle_unit(svc->unit) )
>>>>>> +    {
>>>>>> +        unsigned long flags;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +        spin_lock_irqsave(&prv->lock, flags);
>>>>>> +        rt_admission_test(prv, svc->unit->domain,
>>>>>> +                           svc->period, svc->budget, 0, 0);
>>>>>
>>>>> This use case clearly shows you are not only testing. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Yet at the same time ignoring possible errors.
>>>
>>> I don't see how this could happen, as new_period and new_budget are both 0 
>>> here.
>>
>> Okay, that's simply entirely invisible here. So before freeing the two
>> items are somehow zeroed?
> 
> Can you please clarify what do you mean here?

Confusion on my part: I assumed talk was of the two svc-> values being passed,
but those are "old". "new" are the two uncommented literal zeroes. Leaving
them uncommented may be okay here; to me that's almost like uncommented literal
"true" / "false" somewhere.

Jan