linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] sched: disabled rt-bandwidth by default

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]

Date:	Thu, 28 Aug 2008 11:42:01 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Mark Hounschell <markh@...pro.net>
cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>,
	Dario Faggioli <raistlin@...ux.it>,
	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] sched: disabled rt-bandwidth by default

On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Mark Hounschell wrote:
> 
> More and more are wanting and now finding the Linux kernel to be more
> RT capable. I seem to remember way back you saying it was one thing you didn't
> really care much about one way or the other. Thats OK. But, you _are_ the man.

The thing is, the reason I dislike RT is that so many people have so 
different understanding of what RT means.

Quite frankly, I think that the people who are complaining (like you) 
think that RT means "hard realtime". You think about literally specialized 
devices.

A lot of _other_ people think that RT means "good audio latency", where it 
really is a lot softer. 

And neither camp seems to ever admit that they are just a small camp, and 
that the other camp exists or is even valid.

And I'm not really interested. Quite frankly, I suspect the "we want to 
run something like pulseaudio with RT priorities" camp is the more common 
one, and in that context I understand limiting SCHED_FIFO sounds perfectly 
understandable.

As to your

> "just to protect a few _supposedly_ bad programmers???"

quite frankly, most programmers aren't "supposedly bad". And if you think 
that the hard-RT "real man" programmers aren't bad, I really have nothing 
to say.

		Linus

--
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/