On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 14:02 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
Up to a point, but explicitly not running runnable tasks complicates the
task model significantly, and interacts with fun stuff like bandwidth
inheritance and priority/deadline inheritance like things -- a subject
you really don't want to complicate further.
We really want to do our utmost best to make applications block on
something without altering our task model.
If applications keep running despite being told repeatedly to cease, I
think the SIGKILL option is a sane one (they got SIGXCPU, SIGSTOP and
SIGTERM before that) and got ample opportunity to block on something.
Traditional cpu resource management treats the CPU as an ever
replenished resource, breaking that assumption (not running runnable
tasks) puts us on very shaky ground indeed.
--