[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    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.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.020 / U:6.136 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site