Sure. If you have a bunch of normal, interactive and niced
processes, then a high-priority process can wait for over a
second before a lock (held by a niced process) is released
and the high-priority process can continue.
Now, if we would follow Linus' idea and extend the range
of niced processes, that time span could increase to 10 or
even more seconds, effectively producing the same kind of
'deadlock' that SCHED_IDLE can produce -- only with an upper
bound to it...
Then throw in SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO processes and you're
gone.
Rik -- Open Source: you deserve to be in control of your data.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Le Reseau netwerksystemen BV: http://www.reseau.nl/ |
| Linux Memory Management site: http://www.linux.eu.org/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/