User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Re: [PATCH 6/6] sched: disabled rt-bandwidth by default

From:  Alan Cox <alan-AT-lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:  Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org>
Subject:  Re: [PATCH 6/6] sched: disabled rt-bandwidth by default
Date:  Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:53:21 +0100
Message-ID:  <20080828215321.7a1fabd5@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:  Mark Hounschell <markh-AT-compro.net>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt-AT-goodmis.org>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin-AT-yahoo.com.au>, Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra-AT-chello.nl>, LKML <linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org>, Stefani Seibold <stefani-AT-seibold.net>, Dario Faggioli <raistlin-AT-linux.it>, Max Krasnyansky <maxk-AT-qualcomm.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx-AT-linutronix.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org>
Archive-link:  Article

> And I'm not really interested. Quite frankly, I suspect the "we want to 
> run something like pulseaudio with RT priorities" camp is the more common 
> one, and in that context I understand limiting SCHED_FIFO sounds perfectly 
> understandable.

Is there actually a reason we can't have two forms of SCHED_FIFO. For
hard RT the existing behaviour is a lot more useful and it is hard to see
how you'd emulate it.

> quite frankly, most programmers aren't "supposedly bad". And if you think 
> that the hard-RT "real man" programmers aren't bad, I really have nothing 
> to say.

"real man" programmers stare at the code in Zen contemplation and debug
by powercycling - thats one thing even hard RT processes can't beat.

Alan


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2008, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds