Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM

Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20T08:09:07Z

* Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> wrote:

> > Or, should that be?
> >
> > if (prio > 0 && prio <= 20 && policy != SCHED_NORMAL) {
>
> Or you can just drop the 'prio == 1 &&' part for this test. Ingo was
> trying to be clever to allow some RT bits, but that's not really
> necessary.

actually, there may be some kernel threads that may run at RT priority
99. But i agree, dropping the test for prio==1 should work just as fine.

Ingo