From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751133AbXCLRjd (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:39:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751935AbXCLRjd (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:39:33 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.186] ([212.12.190.186]:33049 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751133AbXCLRjc (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:39:32 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: jos poortvliet , ck@vds.kolivas.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fair starvation free interactive cpu scheduler Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:41:37 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: Con Kolivas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200703042335.26785.a1426z@gawab.com> <200703121714.25034.a1426z@gawab.com> <200703121559.23157.jos@mijnkamer.nl> In-Reply-To: <200703121559.23157.jos@mijnkamer.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200703122041.37135.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org jos poortvliet wrote: > > It only takes one negatively nice'd proc to affect X adversely. > > Then, maybe, we should start nicing X again, like we did/had to do until a > few years ago? Or should we just wait until X gets fixed (after all, > development goes faster than ever)? Or is this really the scheduler's > fault? It's not enough to renice X. You would have to renice it, and any app that needed fixed latency, to the same nice of the negatively nice'd proc, which defeats the purpose... Thanks! -- Al