Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Jul 1999 21:39:48 +0200 (CEST) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: low priority soft RT? |
| |
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, Bryn Paul Arnold Jones wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jul 1999 cd_smith@ou.edu wrote: > > > Anyone thought about allowing soft RT (SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR) tasks with > > negative priorities? These would only be executed if no other tasks of > > any type are there. Giving a normal Linux task a niceness value won't do > > this, as the task will still get some CPU time. > > So SCHED_IDLE then (only execute this if we would otherwise be > executing the idle task)? It's been talked about before, IIRC > even implemented, it just never got into the mainstream kernel.
I have made a fairly substantial SCHED_IDLE patch, but due to the (never resolved) deadlock issues I haven't submitted it.
OTOH, if we make SCHED_IDLE a sysctl tunable thing, we should be able to just ship it with the standard kernel and provide a Big Fat Warning(tm) along with it...
If there's demand, I'll create a patch RSN.
regards,
Rik -- Open Source: you deserve to be in control of your data. +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Le Reseau netwerksystemen BV: http://www.reseau.nl/ | | Linux Memory Management site: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/ | | Nederlandse Linux documentatie: http://www.nl.linux.org/ | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
- 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/
| |