On Fri, Jun 09, 2000 at 08:28:06PM -0400, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote:
>
> The diff should make a process at -20 which uses all available CPU
> schedule just slightly the ahead of a process at +20 which uses no CPU.
> A process which uses full CPU at 0 niceness would have a priority of
> 128, whereas a process using no CPU at 0 niceness would have a priority
> of 90. All processes will always have a priority less than or equal to
> 128, which is the priority at which a process with a niceness of +20
> always runs at. A +20 process won't get better priority than anything
> else, period. Try it out, see how it works for you:)
I tried this patch today.
While it didn't quite fix the problem, it sure made for some interesting
pacman gameplay. ;-)
Using idprio as Volodymyr suggested seems to be a viable workaround. You
mentioned in another message that idprio could potentially deadlock my
machine, though. Under what conditions could this happen (and how likely
is it to occur)?
-jake
--
Jacob A. Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Powered by: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #18: Sun Jun 11 19:25:03 EST 2000
PGP signature
