Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:02:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:02:35 -0500 Received: from [194.213.32.137] ([194.213.32.137]:9220 "EHLO bug.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:02:16 -0500 Message-ID: <20001221132800.A1398@bug.ucw.cz> Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 13:28:00 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Igmar Palsenberg , Pavel Machek Cc: kernel list Subject: Re: kapm-idled : is this a bug? In-Reply-To: <20001220101142.A6234@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93i In-Reply-To: ; from Igmar Palsenberg on Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 12:00:04PM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > > What's the problem with using PID 0 as the idle task ? That's 'standard' > > > with OS'ses that display the idle task. > > > > Linux has already another thread with pid 0, called "swapper" which is > > in fact idle. kidle-apmd is different beast. > > Agree that it is different. But it confuses people to have two > idle-tasks. I suggest that we throw it one big pile, unless having a > separate apm idle task has a purpose. You can't do that. Doing it this way is _way_ better for system stability, because kidle-apmd sometimes dies due to APM bug. kidle-apmd dying is recoverable error; swapper dieing is as fatal as it can be. Pavel -- I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/