lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Dec]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Gurus, a silly question for preemptive behavior
jesse wrote:
> Con:
>
> thank you for your prompt reply in the holiday
> season.
>
> My point is: Even kernel 2.4 is not
> preemptive, the latence should be very
> minimal.(<300ms)
> why user space application with low nice priority
> can't be effectively interrupted and holds the CPU
> resource since all user space application is
> preemptive?

If your process has got work to do and has a higher priority than other
processes, it gets to run. If you don't want this behavior, don't give
it such a high priority.

If you want low latency to do some quick high priority task, just do it
quickly and relinquish the processor, instead of hogging it.

What are you trying to accomplish, anyway?

--
Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com

"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."
Lao-tzu, The Way of Lao-tzu
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08    [W:0.053 / U:1.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site