On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 10:10 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Saturday 03 June 2006 03:12, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > Not sure. RT io needs to be considered carefully, but I guess so does RT
> > CPU scheduling. For now I'd prefer to play it a little safer, and only
> > inheric the priority value and not the class.
> 
> The problem I envisioned with that was that realtime tasks, if they don't 
> specify an io priority (as most current code doesn't), would basically get io 
> priority 4 and have the same proportion as any nice 0 SCHED_NORMAL task 
> whereas -nice tasks automatically are getting better io priority. How about 
> givent them normal class but best priority so they are at least getting the 
> same as nice -20?
> 

Con,

Have you seen RT threads trying to disk IO 'in the wild' or is this a
theoretical concern?  I don't know of any such apps.

Lee

-
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/