[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1198319970.5509.10.camel@homer.simson.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:39:30 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kthread: run kthreadd with max priority SCHED_FIFO
On Sat, 2007-12-22 at 04:52 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> So, user tasks running with SCHED_FIFO should be able to lock a system?
> I guess I see both sides of this argument - yes, it's userspace at
> fault, but in other cases when userspace is at fault, we take action
> (OOM, segfault, others). Isn't this situation just another case where
> the kernel needs to avoid the evils of userland going awry?
FYI, Ingo queued the below.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/31/344
-Mike
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists