Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:27:10 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cfq + io priorities |
| |
Hi!
> I suppose the nice() wrapper in glibc could > be modified... but that's kind of silly when > the kernel is getting modified anyway.
Perhaps modifying glibc is the right way after all. We do not want to have nice(), ionice() and then cpunice() as a kernel interface.
OTOH it would be good to keep ionice() on the same scale as other "nice" values so that "do-it-all" interface is easier.
Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?] - 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/
| |