lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: low priority soft RT?
    (note new email address)

    Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
    > There's a much, much easier way --- just revoke the SCHED_IDLE
    > scheduling class when a process explicitly calls schedule(). That
    > automatically takes care of every single case where a process gives up
    > the CPU from inside the kernel. The only special case then becomes the
    > schedule inside return_to_user, where we want to keep SCHED_IDLE
    > intact.
    >
    > However, that adds code to two of the hottest paths in the whole
    > kernel. Not nice.

    Then perhaps the best compromise is to make SCHED_IDLE a compile
    time option. If you want to support "true" SCHED_IDLE you must take
    the performance hit in schedule() to be safe from lock starvation.
    If you don't compile "true" SCHED_IDLE into the kernel it would
    just get mapped to be the same as 'nice 19' or whatever.

    -Mitch

    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.020 / U:89.876 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site