Re: [PATCH 5/6] sched: SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR watchdog timer
- From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 23:03:28 +0100
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 22:49 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Introduce a new rlimit that allows the user to set a runtime timeout
on real-time tasks. Once this limit is exceeded the task will receive
SIGXCPU.
Nice idea.
It would be even nicer if you could allow a couple of them. Partition
the RT priorities into a few classes and have an own limit for each them.
A small number of classes (3-4) would be probably enough and not bloat
the rlimits too much.
I'm thinking of the case where you have different kinds of real
time processes. Like your mp3 player which you want to be slightly
real time, but with a low SIGXCPU limit.
And then something else real time which is more important and
you would set a higher limit. etc.
But its an rlimit, it can be set per process. Not sure what multiple
classes per process would gain us, let alone how that process has to
figure out which class to use.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [PATCH 0/6] various scheduler patches
- From: Peter Zijlstra
- [PATCH 5/6] sched: SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR watchdog timer
- From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH 5/6] sched: SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR watchdog timer
- From: Andi Kleen
- [PATCH 0/6] various scheduler patches
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] ucc_geth: add support for netpoll
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/6] sched: high-res preemption tick
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 5/6] sched: SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR watchdog timer
- Next by thread: [PATCH 3/6] sched: high-res preemption tick
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|