Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 6 Jul 2003 02:28:57 +0100 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: 2.5.74-mm1 |
| |
Daniel Phillips wrote: > What are you going to do if you have one > application you want to take priority, re-nice the other 50?
Is that effective? It might be just the trick.
> > Something I've often thought would fix this is to allow normal users > > to set negative priority which is limited to using X% of the CPU - > > i.e. those tasks would have their priority raised if they spent more > > than a small proportion of their time using the CPU. > > That's essentially SCHED_RR. As I mentioned above, it's not clear > to me why SCHED_RR requires superuser privilege, since the amount of > CPU you can burn that way is bounded. Well, the total of all > SCHED_RR processes would need to be bounded as well, which is > straightforward.
Your last point is most important. At the moment, a SCHED_RR process with a bug will basically lock up the machine, which is totally inappropriate for a user app.
-- Jamie - 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/
| |