Re: [PATCH] Make highly niced processes run only when idle

[Niteshadow]

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 12:46:23AM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 9 Dec 2001, Robert Love wrote:
>=20
> > Hmm, what if we only boosted it based on something like this:
> >
> > 	if (p->policy =3D=3D SCHED_IDLE) {
> > 		weight =3D p->counter;
> > 		if (p->lock_depth >=3D 0 || signal_pending(p))
> > 			/* boost somehow ... */
> > 	}
>=20
> Now what if the process is holding an inode or superblock
> semaphore ?

Even better:

What if the SCHED_IDLE task holds a POSIX read lock on a file ?

Say we have three processes:
A is SCHED_IDLE holding read lock on /foo/bar
B is SCHED_OTHER wanting to acquire write lock /foo/bar
C is SCHED_OTHER computing fractals and eating up every cycle it can get

What we want is A to get B's priority until it releases the lock on
/foo/bar and then revert it to SCHED_IDLE policy. Otherwise B would get
deadlocked with A while C (or any other CPU hog) is running.

I know this is a userspace problem (similar to real-time processes vs.
normal processes), but I think it would be nice to make SCHED_IDLE
non-priviliged policy.

--=20
Kind regards,
Robert Varga
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---
[e-mail]                                          http://hq.sk/~nite/gpgkey.=
txt
=20

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8FKnG9aKR2/T45h8RArjwAKC69pKJAwIOF/mH+ICbu+w1Mf3b1wCfaOmU
TVsF/EQcE445DPjUsDYQwMQ=
=vI1m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1--