From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
Cc: root <r6144@263.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make highly niced processes run only when idle
Date: 09 Dec 2001 18:05:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1007939114.878.1.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <75F30A52-ECF4-11D5-80FE-00039355CFA6@suespammers.org>
In-Reply-To: <75F30A52-ECF4-11D5-80FE-00039355CFA6@suespammers.org>
On Sun, 2001-12-09 at 17:31, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> One of two things:
> 1) The higher priority task will no longer be runnable; or
> 2) We gave enough rope to hang yourself, and, well, you did.
and (3) the lower priority task won't be runnable either.
Without addressing this (and it is addressable, see below) this feature
won't make it into the kernel. It isn't an argument to say "we gave you
the rope and you took it" because if I idle task some random application
because it deserves little time, I shouldn't have to think of what
resource/kernel semantics it and another task are going to get into a
priority inversion fight over.
I've seen a few solutions. The easiest is to just give idle tasks a
"boost" on occasion to give them a chance to prevent the deadlock. You
then, however, have the problem where the tasks can take advantage of
the boost... Or, we could fix in-kernel deadlocks by doing priority
inheriting on locks held by A and wanted by B (i.e., if A holds
something B wants, boost A's priority temporarily to that of B's). But
that is probably overkill ... note to do any of these it is probably
cleanest to make a SCHED_IDLE scheduling class.
maybe I'll put a patch together ...
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-09 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-08 4:38 [PATCH] Make highly niced processes run only when idle root
2001-12-08 4:39 ` Robert Love
2001-12-09 22:31 ` Anthony DeRobertis
2001-12-09 23:05 ` Robert Love [this message]
2001-12-09 23:16 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2001-12-09 23:21 ` Robert Love
2001-12-09 23:46 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2001-12-10 0:30 ` Robert Love
2001-12-10 2:46 ` Rik van Riel
2001-12-10 12:25 ` Niteshadow
2001-12-11 1:35 ` Steve Bergman
2001-12-19 23:49 ` Pavel Machek
2001-12-11 1:36 ` Ton Hospel
2001-12-11 1:54 ` Robert Love
2001-12-13 21:42 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1007939114.878.1.camel@phantasy \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=asd@suespammers.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=r6144@263.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox