LWN: Comments on "Audio latency - resource limits win" https://lwn.net/Articles/134460/ This is a special feed containing comments posted to the individual LWN article titled "Audio latency - resource limits win". en-us Sun, 07 Sep 2025 05:48:48 +0000 Sun, 07 Sep 2025 05:48:48 +0000 https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification lwn@lwn.net Value range https://lwn.net/Articles/135005/ https://lwn.net/Articles/135005/ giraffedata You're both right. The name should be RLIMIT_MEAN. A limit on how mean you can be. <p> I don't know anything about the early history of nice, but I suspect the negative values were an add-on. I think someone setting out to design a general CPU share setting wouldn't do it that way. Fri, 06 May 2005 23:48:56 +0000 Value range https://lwn.net/Articles/134878/ https://lwn.net/Articles/134878/ phiggins I was thinking the same thing at first, but since we are talking about a limit, it makes more sense to have increasing privilege correspond to an increasing limit. That way it's more like all the other limits. It's really the negative values for nice that are weird.<br> Thu, 05 May 2005 21:28:12 +0000 Value range https://lwn.net/Articles/134754/ https://lwn.net/Articles/134754/ Ross The values could at least match the name: smaller values should be less<br> nice and larger values more nice. Or maybe they should name the resource<br> "notnice" :)<br> <p> Thu, 05 May 2005 07:52:58 +0000