Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:26:43 +0200 (MET DST) | From | Max <> | Subject | Re: Tiny patch: nice 20 as idle priority |
| |
On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Rik van Riel wrote:
>As usual, the SCHED_IDLE patch has some problems: >- if you run more SCHED_IDLE processes, only the first > one will get any CPU time assigned >- it is a gross hack (well, the nice +20 part looks nice > to me, but the other parts don't) >- it will have continuous recalculation of all process > priorities > >If there is demand for it, I'll create a scheduler >patch that includes both my stuff, Richard's RT >stuff and a complete SCHED_IDLE package (complete >with the nice +20 hack ;).
I hope you noticed that the patch I sent has nothing to do with SCHED_IDLE. Well, actually it was intended as a *replacement* of the kernel scheduling policy SCHED_IDLE, as I had a look at it and didn't like it :(
>Rik. >
Massimiliano Ghilardi
---------------------------------------------------------------- | I have yet to meet a person who had a bad experience of Linux. | | Most have never had an experience. | ----------------------------------------------------------------
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |