lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] O13int for interactivity


Rob Landley wrote:

>On Tuesday 05 August 2003 06:32, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>
>>But by employing the kernel's services in the shape of a blocking
>>syscall, all sleeps are intentional.
>>
>
>Wrong. Some sleeps indicate "I have run out of stuff to do right now, I'm
>going to wait for a timer or another process or something to wake me up with
>new work".
>
>
>
>Some sleeps indicate "ideally this would run on an enormous ramdisk attached
>to gigabit ethernet, but hard drives and internet connections are just too
>slow so my true CPU-hogness is hidden by the fact I'm running on a PC instead
>of a mainframe."
>

I don't quite understand what you are getting at, but if you don't want to
sleep you should be able to use a non blocking syscall. But in some cases
I think there are times when you may not be able to use a non blocking call.

And if a process is a CPU hog, its a CPU hog. If its not its not. Doesn't
matter how it would behave on another system.




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans