From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.12] helo=sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Cipher TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 1AEviK-0006ER-00 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 11:10:40 -0800 Received: from smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.33]) by sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AEvi3-0008Sx-Le for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 11:10:23 -0800 From: BlaisorBlade Subject: Re: [uml-devel] Problem with Real-Time Scheduling References: <000001c39b80$e011fbe0$3d4bd540@celery> <200310261909.h9QJ92CN012291@ccure.karaya.com> <3F9C3B38.6000708@vgertech.com> In-Reply-To: <3F9C3B38.6000708@vgertech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200310292012.10949.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 20:12:10 +0100 To: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Alle 22:23, domenica 26 ottobre 2003, Nuno Silva ha scritto: > Hi! > > Wouldn't it be nice if the threads updated their argv[0] to something like > "argv[0]-kernel" > "argv[0]-userspace" > "argv[0]-sigio" > "argv[0]-sigwinch"? > > I would send a patch but my first attempt didn't work... Can this be > done? > Maybe renicing the threads could help in environments where you > have lots of UMLs running? Like having the kernel runnig at -10 and > userspace at 19 and sigio at 19? Avoid nice=19 since there have been some notable patches in 2.5(even present in 2.4-ck tree) to make such task run only in place of the idle task. And having the kernel running at -10 means having high permissions. Adding an option to make UML switch to some UID after startup is not difficult. But first we need to know until which point it needs root priviledges. And probably, capabilities are just enough. And at some point, in 2.6 there will be setcapability extended attributes(it's not hard now that extended attrs work). > Maybe this could make the "time" inside > UML more consistent in high loads? > > Comments? > > Regards, > Nuno Silva -- cat <