linux-kernel - Re: itimer again (Re: [PATCH] RTC: Add mmap method to rtc character driver)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1154224927.2467.14.camel@entropy>
Date:	Sat, 29 Jul 2006 19:02:07 -0700
From:	Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>
To:	Bill Huey <billh@...ppy.monkey.org>
Cc:	Edgar Toernig <froese@....de>, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Jim Gettys <jg@...top.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
	Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, a.zummo@...ertech.it,
	jg@...edesktop.org, Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: itimer again (Re: [PATCH] RTC: Add mmap method to rtc
	character driver)

On Sat, 2006-07-29 at 18:39 -0700, Bill Huey wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 06:22:59PM -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-07-29 at 18:00 -0700, Bill Huey wrote:
> > > Think edge triggered verse level triggered. Event interfaces in the Linux
> > > kernel are sort of just that, edge triggered events. What RT folks generally
> > > want is control over scheduling policies over a particular time period in
> > > relation to a scheduling policy. A general kernel event interface isn't
> >                 ^ Did you mean to say timer here?
> 
> No, I really ment scheduling.

OK, so what does control of a scheduling policy in relation to a
scheduling policy mean?

> > > going to cut it for those purpose and wasn't design to deal with those cases
> > > in the first place.
> > 
> > So you're asking for an automatic (perhaps temporary) change in
> > scheduling policy when a particular timer expires (or perhaps on
> > occurrence of other types of events)?
> 
> > I think Windows automatically boosts the priority of a thread when it
> > delivers an I/O completion notification, and I'm pretty sure that
> > Microsoft has a patent related to that.
> 
> Na, different problem altogether. It's better that'd shut up.
> 

I'm actually interested, and I imagine other people are too.

-- 
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>

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