Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM

[Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2005-01-14 at 15:11 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:
> > It sounds to me like both your proposals may be too complex and not
> > sufficiently deterministic (I don't know for sure, maybe that's
> > exactly what the RT people want).
> 
> This is the solution already employed in the real world by OSX. It works
> well, and the audio people have told me they are happy with it.
> 

Alternatively, could you grant the required capabilities to use real
RT scheduling and not foul up the scheduler?

Or do a similar sort of thing with a userspace daemon that manages
priorities and watches CPU usage?

Basically I'd prefer not to put hacks in the (mainline) scheduler to
handle this pretty specific special case.

> > I could be completely off the rails though. I haven't really been
> > following this thread so please shoot me in my foot if I have put it
> > in my mouth.
> 
> If your foot is in your mouth and you ask me to shoot you in the foot it
> would blow your head off... Hmm it's tempting...
> 

Meeeow!



-
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/