I understand that, I was talking about fairness between capped tasks
and what might be considered fair or intutive between capped tasks and
regular tasks. Of course, the last point is debatable ;)
Well, the primary fairness mechanism in the scheduler is the time slice
allocation and the capping code doesn't fiddle with those so there
should be a reasonable degree of fairness (taking into account "nice")
between capped tasks. To improve that would require allocating several
new priority slots for use by tasks exceeding their caps and fiddling
with those. I don't think that it's worth the bother.
I suppose it should be handled still. a subjective feeling :)
BTW, do you have any test results for your patch?
It would be interesting to see how precise these limitations are and
whether or not we should bother for the above...
Kirill
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
