Re: [PATCH] O13int for interactivity

[Timothy Miller]

Nick Piggin wrote:

> >
>
> 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.

The idea is that this kind of process WANTS to be a CPU hog.  If it were 
not for the fact that the I/O is not immediately available, it would 
never want to sleep.  The only thing it ever blocks on is the read, and 
this is involuntary.  It doesn't use a non blocking call because it 
can't continue without the data.

The questions is:  Does this matter for the issue of interactivity?


-
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/