On Sunday 22 April 2007 08:54, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> On Saturday 21 April 2007 18:00, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > correct. Note that Willy reniced X back to 0 so it had no relevance on
> > his test. Also note that i pointed this change out in the -v4 CFS
> >
> > announcement:
> > || Changes since -v3:
> > ||
> > || - usability fix: automatic renicing of kernel threads such as
> > || keventd, OOM tasks and tasks doing privileged hardware access
> > || (such as Xorg).
> >
> > i've attached it below in a standalone form, feel free to put it into
> > SD! :)
>
> But X problems have nothing to do with "privileged hardware access".
> X problems are related to priority inversions between server and client
> processes, and "one server process - many client processes" case.
It's not a privileged hardware access reason that this code is there. This is
obfuscation/advertising to make it look like there is a valid reason for X
getting negative nice levels somehow in the kernel to make interactive
testing of CFS better by default.
--
-ck
-
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]
