Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:36:09 -0400 | From | Timothy Miller <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] O13int for interactivity |
| |
Nick Piggin wrote:
>> > > I don't quite understand what you are getting at, but if you don't > want to > sleep you should be able to use a non blocking syscall. But in some cases > I think there are times when you may not be able to use a non blocking > call. > > And if a process is a CPU hog, its a CPU hog. If its not its not. Doesn't > matter how it would behave on another system. > >
The idea is that this kind of process WANTS to be a CPU hog. If it were not for the fact that the I/O is not immediately available, it would never want to sleep. The only thing it ever blocks on is the read, and this is involuntary. It doesn't use a non blocking call because it can't continue without the data.
The questions is: Does this matter for the issue of interactivity?
- 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/
| |