From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271715AbTHHRkB (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Aug 2003 13:40:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271731AbTHHRkB (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Aug 2003 13:40:01 -0400 Received: from 153.Red-213-4-13.pooles.rima-tde.net ([213.4.13.153]:41733 "EHLO small.felipe-alfaro.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271715AbTHHRj6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Aug 2003 13:39:58 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6: More about interactivity From: Felipe Alfaro Solana To: Szonyi Calin Cc: LKML In-Reply-To: <28816.194.138.39.55.1060356015.squirrel@webmail.etc.utt.ro> References: <1060280139.1406.17.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com> <28816.194.138.39.55.1060356015.squirrel@webmail.etc.utt.ro> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1060364377.600.2.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4 Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 19:39:37 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 17:20, Szonyi Calin wrote: > Some comments: > Renicing X at -20 is silly. It is normal that xmms skips when > X is reniced because X gets the cpu time not xmms. I didn't say XMMS skips when X is reniced at -20 :-) It's Juk the one that skips and, as one LKLM reader said, it has to do with the fact that aRTS had less priority than X. > Also a normal user doesn't have access to nice values below > zero, so the scheduler should work for normal systems not > for those in which process foo is reniced at -bar priority. Can't follow you reasoning. I think the scheduler should work for any priority, either negative (the most) or possitive (the least). In fact, some kernel threads are reniced negatively since they need full priority.