>On Thu, 14 Jan 1999, Robert M. Hyatt wrote:
>
>> This would make a good discussion point, since it is a topic I am
>> highly interested in. Take a process whose nice value is 0. And
>> a process that has been niced to +10. What is the expectation there?
>
>The expectation is that the +10 niced program gets half the
>CPU time from the 'normal' process.
>
>> I'd _really_ like to have a nice value that says "don't run unless
>> you are twiddling your thumbs". Ie a nice 20 perhaps, that says I
>> don't want this to run unless there is _nothing_ else to schedule.
>
>I have a patch that does this. But since the patch can trigger
>a known race condition (hardly ever happens, I've seen it once
>in 4 months) and since I want people to test vanilla 2.2.0-pre*
>as much as possible I haven't updated the patch since -132.
Hehe. That's exactly what a friend of mine and me wrote some time ago:
we added nice +20 as `idle' priority. Our small patch was refused on
linux-kernel in favour of the patch containing sched-idle and other things,
but if someone wants it, I can resurrect it.
For the moment I rescued a diff against 2.0.36, but porting it to 2.2.0-preX
is easy, jusk ask ;)
Massimiliano Ghilardi
P.S. I am subscribed to linux-kernel but not to linux-smp.
Please remember that if you reply to this message.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/