Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:21:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:20:59 -0500 Received: from hq.fsmlabs.com ([209.155.42.197]:6151 "EHLO hq.fsmlabs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:20:51 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:18:01 -0700 From: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com To: Roman Zippel Cc: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com, Momchil Velikov , Daniel Phillips , Arjan van de Ven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable Message-ID: <20020114091801.A23139@hq.fsmlabs.com> In-Reply-To: <20020114064548.D22065@hq.fsmlabs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from zippel@linux-m68k.org on Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 03:56:05PM +0100 Organization: FSM Labs Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 03:56:05PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2002 yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote: > > > is going to be an enormously important issue. However, once you add SCHED_FIFO in the > > current scheme, this becomes more complex. And with preempt, you cannot even offer the > > assurance that once a process gets the cpu it will make _any_ advance at all. > > I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, but how is this related to > preempt? It's pretty subtle. If there is no preempt, processes don't get preempted. If there is preempt, they can be preempted. Amazing isn't it? - 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/