On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 01:11:01PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > Very low priority can starve others when it holds some kernel resource > needed by another task. Nevertheless ordinary users are permitted to lower priority ([re]nice) and resource limits (setrlimit). > For IO I suppose the same could happen too. e.g. low priority > task wants to write out a page and keeps it locked until the IO > is finished. High priority task wants to access the page and has > to wait until it is unlocked. Middle task generates an endless > stream of IO that makes the idle priority writeout never finish. I don't quite understand. There are a lot of other ways to starve such high-priority process: 1. renice the low-priority process 2. send it a signal 3. ptrace it 4. use something like cpulimit (http://cpulimit.sourceforge.net/) to stall it .... So I think current behaviour of ionice is inconsistent (and pointless). P.S. Please CC me, I'm not subscribed. Best regards, Alexei -- All science is either physics or stamp collecting.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: allow non root users to set io priority "idle" ?
- From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
- Re: allow non root users to set io priority "idle" ?
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: allow non root users to set io priority "idle" ?
- References:
- allow non root users to set io priority "idle" ?
- From: dragoran <[email protected]>
- Re: allow non root users to set io priority "idle" ?
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- allow non root users to set io priority "idle" ?
- Prev by Date: [PATCH] mmc: at91_mci: remove whitespace at the end of lines
- Next by Date: Re: [patch 2/4] sdio: set the functions' block size
- Previous by thread: Re: allow non root users to set io priority "idle" ?
- Next by thread: Re: allow non root users to set io priority "idle" ?
- Index(es):
 |