> (What's the difference between a process taking most of the CPU and one
> taking all of it on a slightly slower machine? A process, realtime or not,
> that cares that it's running 5% slower than otherwise is a broken process
> --- just like one that hogs the CPU constantly for ten seconds and doesn't
> let anyone else get a word in edgeways.)
The process running 100% of the time on a slow machine will see time progress in small increments (say, if it calls gettimeofday in a loop, it'll see it progress a few microseconds at a time) while the process running 95% on a fast machine will see a large time increment once in a while, when it is descheduled. So, there definitely is a difference, for realtime processes.
Still, I do not understand why one would try to yank 100% of the CPU on a posix system and expect the underlying OS to work fine...