On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 09:07:42PM +1100, Nick Piggin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >Doesn't the provided solution is just a in-kernel variant of the > >SCHED_FIFO set from userspace? Why kernel should be able to mark some > >users as having higher priority? > >What if workload of the system is targeted to not the maximum TCP > >performance, but maximum other-task performance, which will be broken > >with provided patch. > > David's line of thinking for a solution sounds better to me. This patch > does not prevent the process from being preempted (for potentially a long > time), by any means.
It steals timeslices from other processes to complete tcp_recvmsg() task, and only when it does it for too long, it will be preempted. Processing backlog queue on behalf of need_resched() will break fairness too - processing itself can take a lot of time, so process can be scheduled away in that part too. > -- > SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. > Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -- Evgeniy Polyakov - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
