I completely agree on this one. We should probably mark a process
with "bonus" if another process tries to grab a lock that's held
by the first process.
It should involve no more than a little bit of code added to
the _slow_ patch -- keeping clean the fast path...
In the meantime, SCHED_IDLE should be controllable by root
(sysctl) as it is in my patch. It's a useful feature and
everybody should be able to make a decision about the risks
involved themselves (you can even start selected processes
under SCHED_IDLE and then disable it again).
Rik -- Open Source: you deserve to be in control of your data.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Le Reseau netwerksystemen BV: http://www.reseau.nl/ |
| Linux Memory Management site: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/ |
| Nederlandse Linux documentatie: http://www.nl.linux.org/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/