Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 07:42:37 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>
Cc: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>, paul@linuxaudiosystems.com, joq@io.com,
       cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com, hch@infradead.org, rlrevell@joe-job.com,
       arjanv@redhat.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM
Message-ID: <20050308064237.GA22762@elte.hu>
References: <20050112185258.GG2940@waste.org> <200501122116.j0CLGK3K022477@localhost.localdomain> <20050307195020.510a1ceb.akpm@osdl.org> <20050308043349.GG3120@waste.org> <20050307204044.23e34019.akpm@osdl.org> <422D3AB2.9020409@bigpond.net.au> <20050308054931.GA20200@elte.hu> <422D4628.8060203@bigpond.net.au> <20050308064006.GI5389@shell0.pdx.osdl.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20050308064006.GI5389@shell0.pdx.osdl.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 854
Lines: 21


* Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org> wrote:

> > Yes.  In kernel "damage control" is an optional extra not a necessity 
> > with this solution.  Not so sure about with the RT LSB solution though.
> 
> This has one advantage over RT LSM in that area, which is it places an
> upper bound on the priority (in control of the admin).  So it's
> possible to save some space for damage control in the top few prio
> slots.

it's not just purely for damage control - there have been requests of
being able to 'partition' the RT priorities space between applications. 
(It's an afterthought but nice nevertheless.)

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/