* Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.
a fair number of apps assume that there's _at least_ 100 levels of
priorities. The moment you have a custom kernel that offers more than
100 priorities, there will be apps that assume that there are more than
100 priority levels, and will break if there are less.
Ingo
-
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/
[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]
| |
 |