I'm not a kernel hacker by any stretch of the imagination but I do
follow lkml. While SCHED_IDLE would be really nice it seems like this
topic comes up from time to time there always seems to be a (deadlock)
catch that keeps it from getting into the main kernel tree. While it
would be really great if Robert's patch turns out to be the magic bullet
this time, as a Linux user and SetiAtHome supporter I would be happy
just to have a "nice -19" that was truly nice. Running setiathome at
nice -19 on my box and then firing up a processor intensive process at
normal priority, I find that seti still uses 14% processor according to
top. I like to run 2 setiathome processes because I get better overall
throughput that way, but the 2 combined then get ~25% of the processor.
Not really all that nice. Would it be difficult to make "19" a special
case that was really, really nice, but not *totally* nice? Avoiding
deadlock but still following the spirit of SCHED_IDLE?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 15 2001 - 21:00:19 EST