[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] O13int for interactivity

Nick Piggin wrote:

> 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.

The idea is that this kind of process WANTS to be a CPU hog. If it were
not for the fact that the I/O is not immediately available, it would
never want to sleep. The only thing it ever blocks on is the read, and
this is involuntary. It doesn't use a non blocking call because it
can't continue without the data.

The questions is: Does this matter for the issue of interactivity?

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 13:47    [W:0.112 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site