Re: [PATCH] O13int for interactivity

[Nick Piggin]

Rob Landley wrote:

> On Tuesday 05 August 2003 06:32, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>
> > But by employing the kernel's services in the shape of a blocking
> > syscall, all sleeps are intentional.
>
> Wrong.  Some sleeps indicate "I have run out of stuff to do right now, I'm 
> going to wait for a timer or another process or something to wake me up with 
> new work".
>  
>
>
> Some sleeps indicate "ideally this would run on an enormous ramdisk attached 
> to gigabit ethernet, but hard drives and internet connections are just too 
> slow so my true CPU-hogness is hidden by the fact I'm running on a PC instead 
> of a mainframe."

I don't quite understand what you are getting at, but if you don't want to
sleep you should be able to use a non blocking syscall. But in some cases
I think there are times when you may not be able to use a non blocking call.

And if a process is a CPU hog, its a CPU hog. If its not its not. Doesn't
matter how it would behave on another system.




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/