linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Sat. wrote:
2005/8/27, Christopher Friesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sat. wrote:
the case about kernel preemption as follow :
the book said "when a process that has a higher priority than the
currenty running process is awakened ".
but I can
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Sat. wrote:
> 2005/8/27, Christopher Friesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Sat. wrote:
>>> the case about kernel preemption as follow :
>>>
>>> the book said "when a process that has a higher priority than the
>>> currenty running process is awakened ".
>>>
>>> but I can think abou
On 8/27/05, Sat. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2005/8/27, Christopher Friesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Sat. wrote:
> > > the case about kernel preemption as follow :
> > >
> > > the book said "when a process that has a higher priority than the
> > > currenty running process is awakened ".
> > >
> >
2005/8/27, Christopher Friesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sat. wrote:
> > the case about kernel preemption as follow :
> >
> > the book said "when a process that has a higher priority than the
> > currenty running process is awakened ".
> >
> > but I can think about when such case can occur , could you
4 matches
Mail list logo