On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 10:03, Con Kolivas wrote:
> About the only scenario I can envision a high priority task being delayed
> with the code as it currently is in 2.6.12-mm1 is with a high priority task
> being on the expired array and a low priority task being delayed on the
> active array. This still should not create large latencies unless array
> swapping is significantly delayed. I considered adding a check for this
> originally but it seemed to be unnecessary extra complexity since an
> expired task by design is expected to be delayed more anyway.

BTW if this is an issue it would only require a patch like this.

Cheers,
Con