Re: [PATCH] sched: Fix adverse effects of NFS client on interactive response

[Con Kolivas]

On Sunday 08 January 2006 10:31, Peter Williams wrote:
> In any case and in the meantime, perhaps the solution is to use
> TASK_NONINTERACTIVE where needed but treat
> TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE|TASK_NONINTERACTIVE sleep the same as
> TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE sleep instead of ignoring it?

That's how I would tackle it.

Con
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/