From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272583AbTHKNo1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:44:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272589AbTHKNoG (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:44:06 -0400 Received: from dsl092-053-140.phl1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.92.53.140]:33241 "EHLO grelber.thyrsus.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272583AbTHKNjX (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:39:23 -0400 From: Rob Landley Reply-To: rob@landley.net To: Timothy Miller , Charlie Baylis Subject: Re: [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 04:14:28 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@kolivas.org References: <20030804195058.GA8267@cray.fish.zetnet.co.uk> <3F303494.3030406@techsource.com> In-Reply-To: <3F303494.3030406@techsource.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308110414.28569.rob@landley.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 05 August 2003 18:49, Timothy Miller wrote: > Or closer to the point: > > "For each record player, there is a record which it cannot play." > For more detail, please read this dialog: > http://www.geocities.com/g0del_escher_bach/dialogue4.html ... > The interactivity detection algorithm will always be inherently > imperfect. Given that it is not psychic, it cannot tell in advance > whether or not a given process is supposed to be interactive, so it must > GUESS based on its behavior. Another way of looking at it is that every time you remove a bottleneck, the next most serious problem becomes the new bottleneck. Does this mean it's a bad idea to stop trying to identify the next bottleneck? (Whether or not you then choose to deal with it is another question...) Rob