On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 21:11 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > How would you go about ensuring that there won't be any cycles wasted?
SCHED_IDLE or otherwise nice 19 > Killing the known corner case starvation scenarios is wonderful, but > let's not just pretend that interactive tasks don't have any special > requirements. Interaction wants low latency, getting that is traditionally expressed in priorities - the highest prio gets the least latency (all RTOSs work like that). There is nothing that warrants giving them more CPU time IMHO; if you think they deserve more, express that using priorities. Priorities are a well understood concept and they work; heuristics can (and Murphy tells us they will) go wrong. Getting the server/client thing working can be done without heuristics using class based scheduling. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/