yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote:
> > > is going to be an enormously important issue. However, once you add SCHED_FIFO in the
> > > current scheme, this becomes more complex. And with preempt, you cannot even offer the
> > > assurance that once a process gets the cpu it will make _any_ advance at all.
> >
> > I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, but how is this related to
> > preempt?
>
> It's pretty subtle. If there is no preempt, processes don't get preempted.
> If there is preempt, they can be preempted. Amazing isn't it?
I just can't win against such brilliant argumentation, I'm out.
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/