From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263165AbUCYOZh (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:25:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263164AbUCYOZW (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:25:22 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.31.123]:50138 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263165AbUCYOYw (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:24:52 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 15:16:26 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Horst von Brand Cc: Muli Ben-Yehuda , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Scheduler: Process priority fed back to parent? Message-ID: <20040325141625.GF1505@openzaurus.ucw.cz> References: <20040316154611.GA31510@mulix.org> <200403161849.i2GInfF0007372@eeyore.valparaiso.cl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200403161849.i2GInfF0007372@eeyore.valparaiso.cl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 16-03-04 14:49:41, Horst von Brand wrote: > Muli Ben-Yehuda said: > > [...] > > > This is something that I've thought of doing in the past. The reason I > > didn't pursue it further is that it's impossible to get it right for > > all cases, and it attacks the problem in the wrong place. The kernel > > shouldn't need to guess(timate) what the process is going to do. The > > userspace programmer, who knows what his process is going to do, > > should tell the kernel. > > People have been known to lie on occasion, particularly when it is to their > advantage... You could heavily penalize process that lied... Or perhaps his user. -- 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms