Hi!
> > > What's the problem with using PID 0 as the idle task ? That's 'standard'
> > > with OS'ses that display the idle task.
> >
> > Linux has already another thread with pid 0, called "swapper" which is
> > in fact idle. kidle-apmd is different beast.
>
> Agree that it is different. But it confuses people to have two
> idle-tasks. I suggest that we throw it one big pile, unless having a
> separate apm idle task has a purpose.
You can't do that. Doing it this way is _way_ better for system
stability, because kidle-apmd sometimes dies due to APM
bug. kidle-apmd dying is recoverable error; swapper dieing is as fatal
as it can be.
Pavel
--
I'm [EMAIL PROTECTED] "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
