From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261276AbVALDUg (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:20:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261354AbVALDUd (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:20:33 -0500 Received: from mail.joq.us ([67.65.12.105]:38311 "EHLO sulphur.joq.us") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261276AbVALDUZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:20:25 -0500 To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Chris Wright , Matt Mackall , Paul Davis , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Lee Revell , arjanv@redhat.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM References: <20050110212019.GG2995@waste.org> <200501111305.j0BD58U2000483@localhost.localdomain> <20050111191701.GT2940@waste.org> <20050111125008.K10567@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20050111205809.GB21308@elte.hu> <20050111131400.L10567@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20050111212719.GA23477@elte.hu> From: "Jack O'Quin" Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:21:48 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20050111212719.GA23477@elte.hu> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:27:19 +0100") Message-ID: <87sm57qqlv.fsf@sulphur.joq.us> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) XEmacs/21.4 (Corporate Culture, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar writes: > * Chris Wright wrote: > >> Hmm, I wonder if this could have anything to do with it. These are >> within striking range: >> >> PID COMMAND NI PRI >> 9 events/1 -10 34 >> 931 kcryptd/1 -10 33 >> 930 kcryptd/0 -10 34 >> 8 events/0 -10 34 >> 892 ata/1 -10 34 >> 891 ata/0 -10 34 >> 3747 udevd -10 33 >> 26 kacpid -10 31 >> 238 aio/1 -10 34 >> 237 aio/0 -10 31 >> 117 kblockd/1 -10 34 >> 116 kblockd/0 -10 34 >> 10 khelper -10 34 > > you are right, i forgot about kernel threads. If they are nice -10 on > Jack's system too then they are within striking range indeed, especially > since they are typically idle and if then they are active for short > bursts of time and get the maximum boost. Jack, could you renice these > to -5, to make sure they dont interfere? Sure. My system does have some of these running at nice -10. Where (how) do I change them? BTW, let's not lose sight of the fact that `nice --20 foo' requires CAP_SYS_NICE just like SCHED_FIFO does. From a privilege perspective, this recurses to the same (still unsolved) problem. Chris's rlimits proposal was the only workable suggestion I've seen for that. Is there any hope of doing something like that in the 2.6.x timeframe? At this point, I no longer even care that PAM will probably start randomly assigning users unlimited scheduling rights like it recently did for mlock. Eventually, that will get fixed. :-( -- joq