[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6507.1231907037@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:23:57 -0500
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Linux killed Kenny, bastard!
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:35:02 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov said:
> It is exactly the purpose of the patch: to kill what is requested to be
> killed.
>
> I wonder how do you expect users to guess via libastral that even
> adjusted score does not work, since it happens that task is so special,
> that it can not be killed :)
What does your patch do if one user has a process 'foo' that they're willing
to have die first, and a process 'bar' that absolutely can't be killed..
Meanwhile, another user has a 'must die first' process 'bar', and a 'must not
die' process 'foo'.
Methinks your patch needs libastral as well?
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists