[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch, 2.6.11-rc2] sched: RLIMIT_RT_CPU_RATIO feature

* Ingo Molnar <> wrote:

> negative nice levels are a guaranteed way to monopolize the CPU.
> SCHED_FIFO with throttling could at most be used to 'steal' CPU time
> up to the threshold. Also, if a task 'runs away' in SCHED_FIFO mode it
> will be efficiently throttled. While if it 'runs away' in nice--20
> mode, it will take away 95+% of the CPU time quite agressively.
> Furthermore, more nice--20 tasks will do much more damage (try thunk.c
> at nice--20!), while more throttled SCHED_FIFO tasks only do damage to
> their own class - the guaranteed share of SCHED_OTHER tasks (and
> privileged RT tasks) is not affected.

furthermore, the current way of throttling SCHED_FIFO tasks that violate
the limit makes it less likely that application writers would abuse the
feature with CPU-intensive apps, because _if_ you violate the limit then
the penalty is high. E.g. a blatant violation of the limit via a pure
CPU loop ends up getting much less CPU time than even the limit would
allow for. For audio/RT apps this is fine, because they must plan their
CPU overhead anyway so they are a much more controlled environment and
just do things properly to avoid the penalty.

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:0.130 / U:4.744 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site