Re: is RSDL an "unfair" scheduler too?

[Avi Kivity]

Helge Hafting wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
> > A fairly contrived example, but I see your point.  Of course any 
> > system can be broken.  I think that user-level scheduling is good for 
> > real multi user systems, where 'user' means a person, not an 
> > artificial entity.  It's also good for a multi application server, 
> > where typically each service runs (or can be made to run) as a 
> > separate user.
> For a not so contrived example, look at email delivery.  Some 
> mailservers do
> all work as root (or some fixed email user)
>
> Some servers will switch to the UID of the user receiving the message, 
> limiting the
> damage in case of buffer overflow etc. A fair amount of work is then done
> as that user - running the message through virus/spam-checks and
> then perhaps procmail.

Actually that makes some sense with user level scheduling - delivering 
email is charged to the recipient instead of to the system.  But I agree 
it's a surprising side effect and if this is ever implemented it should 
be optional.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

-
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/