> I still don't understand the purpose of SCHED_IDLE. It seems as if the
> only purpose is to slow down general execution by a couple of percent
> Someone, maybe it was Linus, pointed out that the current range of
> "nice" levels is totally arbitrary and simply increasing the range
> would do good.
Unfortunately, we showed him he was wrong and the deadlock
could still happen with normal timeslicing processes and
RT tasks...
SCHED_IDLE adds nothing new and has just as little chance
of hanging the computer as normal system things. Because of
this, my patch adds a sysctl variable that the sysadmin has
to switch before normal users are allowed the use of SCHED_IDLE.
This allows the more careful sysadmins to use SCHED_IDLE for,
for instance, rc5des while not impacting normal system behaviour
or stability.
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/