linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RSDL-mm 4/6] sched: dont renice kernel threads

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: <45FAB458.2080304@nortel.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:14:32 -0600
From:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To:	Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>
CC:	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ck list <ck@....kolivas.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RSDL-mm 4/6] sched: dont renice kernel threads

Con Kolivas wrote:
> The practice of renicing kernel threads to negative nice values is of
> questionable benefit at best, and at worst leads to larger latencies when
> kernel threads are busy on behalf of other tasks.

What about the priority implications of the renicing?  It seems a bit 
iffy letting kernel threads compete for cpu time on an equal basis with 
your default shell.

Chris
-
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/