From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753391AbeDIRpw (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:45:52 -0400 Received: from listserv2.niif.hu ([193.225.14.155]:33459 "EHLO listserv2.niif.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751662AbeDIRpv (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:45:51 -0400 From: wferi@niif.hu (Ferenc =?utf-8?Q?W=C3=A1gner?=) To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: wferi@niif.hu Subject: Re: What's the priority of the idle task? References: <20180404143735.GA23925@aton> Mail-Followup-To: Ferenc =?utf-8?Q?W=C3=A1gner?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:45:43 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20180404143735.GA23925@aton> (Till Smejkal's message of "Wed, 4 Apr 2018 16:37:35 +0200") Message-ID: <876050ff3s.fsf@lant.ki.iif.hu> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Till Smejkal writes: > [...] Hence, the idle task is not managed by CFS and accordingly > doesn't have any nice value or priority (or at least it is not > important nowadays). Thanks for your very to-the-point answer! I'm still disturbed by the above statement, though, because not being managed by CFS does not imply having no meaningful priority: RT tasks seem to have one. Did you mean to imply this? Guessing not, I added your answer with code illustrations as https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/436575/119808. -- Regards, Feri