lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:46    [W:0.091 / U:0.904 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site