> And I'm not really interested. Quite frankly, I suspect the "we want to
Is there actually a reason we can't have two forms of SCHED_FIFO. For
hard RT the existing behaviour is a lot more useful and it is hard to see
how you'd emulate it.
> quite frankly, most programmers aren't "supposedly bad". And if you think
"real man" programmers stare at the code in Zen contemplation and debug
by powercycling - thats one thing even hard RT processes can't beat.
Alan
--
| Theodore Tso | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 -- sys_fallocate |
| Amit K. Arora | [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 011/196] sysfs: Fix a copy-n-paste typo in comment |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Frans Pop | svc: failed to register lockdv1 RPC service (errno 97). |
