Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make MAX_RT_PRIO and MAX_USER_RT_PRIO configurable

On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 16:17 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i'd not do this patch, mainly because the '100 priority levels' thing is 
> pretty much an assumption in lots of userspace code. 

I must argue though, any user app that assumes 100 is the max prio is
already broken.  That's why there are system calls to get the actual
range.  Maybe it would be good to change the range to find the apps that
break. And then fix them.

-- Steve


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make MAX_RT_PRIO and MAX_USER_RT_PRIO configurable
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFC][PATCH] Make MAX_RT_PRIO and MAX_USER_RT_PRIO configurable
    • From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make MAX_RT_PRIO and MAX_USER_RT_PRIO configurable
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [2.6 patch] include/linux/bio.h: "extern inline" -> "static inline"
• Next by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make MAX_RT_PRIO and MAX_USER_RT_PRIO configurable
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make MAX_RT_PRIO and MAX_USER_RT_PRIO configurable
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make MAX_RT_PRIO and MAX_USER_RT_PRIO configurable
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]