On 3/18/07, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
quoted text
> On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 06:24 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> > Maybe we're all discussing the problem because we have reached the point
> > where we need two types of schedulers : one for the desktop and one for
> > the servers. After all, this is already what is proposed with preempt,
> > it would make sense provided they share the same core and avoid ifdefs
> > or unused structure members. Maybe adding OPTIONAL unfairness to RSDL
> > would help some scenarios, but in any case it is important to retain
> > the default fairness it provides.
>
> Bingo.
>

Sounds like Staircase's interactive mode switch, except this actually
requires writing additional code.

The per-user system would also be nice for servers, provided there are
CPU/disc IO/swapper/... quotas or priorities at least.

All in all, I'd hate to see mldonkey eating 1/3 of CPU time, just
because it runs as another user.
-
unsubscribe notice
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/