From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266501AbTGEVaT (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2003 17:30:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266502AbTGEVaT (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2003 17:30:19 -0400 Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk ([81.29.64.88]:31371 "EHLO mail.jlokier.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266501AbTGEVaQ (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2003 17:30:16 -0400 Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 22:44:13 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: 2.5.74-mm1 Message-ID: <20030705214413.GA28824@mail.jlokier.co.uk> References: <20030703023714.55d13934.akpm@osdl.org> <200307051728.12891.phillips@arcor.de> <20030705121416.62afd279.akpm@osdl.org> <200307052309.12680.phillips@arcor.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200307052309.12680.phillips@arcor.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Daniel Phillips wrote: > Unfortunately, negative priority requires root privilege, at least > on Debian. > > That's dumb. By default, the root privilege requirement should kick > in at something like -5 or -10, so ordinary users can set priorities > higher than the default, as well as lower. For the millions of > desktop users out there, sound ought to work by default, not be > broken by default. The security problem, on a multi-user box, is that negative priority apps can easily take all of the CPU and effectively lock up the box. Something I've often thought would fix this is to allow normal users to set negative priority which is limited to using X% of the CPU - i.e. those tasks would have their priority raised if they spent more than a small proportion of their time using the CPU. -- Jamie