Re: Real Time scheduler?

Rik van Riel (riel@nl.linux.org)
Tue, 9 Feb 1999 18:47:16 +0100 (CET)

On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Peter Steiner wrote:
> Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>
> >> I already have something like that. It's a modification of how niceness
> >> values are interpreted.
>
> >Wasn't there a problem with kernel locks though?
>
> The patch works here (1 cpu) without a single problem so far. I didn't
> care to much about trying to avoid races or so, just made sure the
> patch fits into the already existing locking stuff.
>
> Now every normal process waiting on that lock sleeps forever. I never
> experienced such a problem so far so I didn't care about it. It might
> be good to give every process at least a minimal amount of the cpu so
> the system can escape those situations.

I've experienced a lockup like that ONCE in 5 months.

For me, this is serious enough to care about. I'll
have a new (totally new) patch once the SMP reboot
and APCI annoyances are fixed (rebooting the system
now often takes 5 tries so I'm not patching at the
moment :).

Rik -- If a Microsoft product fails, who do you sue?
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux Memory Management site: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/ |
| Nederlandse Linux documentatie: http://www.nl.linux.org/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

-
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/