Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> writes:Please google "emoticons" and find out what those funny characters at the end of the of the paragraph you quoted really mean. Sheesh!
Måns Rullgård wrote:
Lee Revell <rlrevell@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:If it runs before the keyboard thread it doesn't matter...
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 22:01 +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote:Maybe extending sysrq+n to lower the priority of -20 tasks would be a
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:A nice -20 SCHED_OTHER task is not realtime, only SCHED_FIFO and
Sysrq+n changes all realtime tasks to normal priority.Subject: can I bring Linux down by running "renice -20Depends on what the cpu_intensive_process does. If it tries to
cpu_intensive_process"?
allocate lots of memory, maybe. If it's _just_ CPU (as in `perl
-e '1 while 1'`), you get a chance that you can input some
commands on a terminal to kill it. SCHED_FIFO'ing or
SCHED_RR'ing such a process is sudden death of course.
SCHED_RR.
good idea.
Of course not, but that's not generally the case.
But why should this hang anything, when there should be enough i/o
to get out of the user process. There's a good fix for this, don't
give this guy root any more ;-)
Ever heard of bugs? Anyone developing a program can make a mistake.
If the program runs with realtime scheduling a bug that makes it enter
an infinite loop (or do something else that hogs the CPU) can be
difficult to find since it rather efficiently locks you out.