[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100426182903.GA14542@8bytes.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 20:29:03 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Ted Baker <baker@...fsu.edu>
Cc: raj@....cmu.edu, jayhawk@....ucsc.edu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
raistlin@...ux.it, niehaus@...c.ku.edu, henrik@...tad.us,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
billh@...ppy.monkey.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
fabio@...dalf.sssup.it, anderson@...unc.edu, tglx@...utronix.de,
dhaval.giani@...il.com, cucinotta@...up.it, lipari@...is.sssup.it,
baker.tlh@...cast.net
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: RFC for a new Scheduling policy/class in the
Linux-kernel]
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 07:56:58AM -0400, Ted Baker wrote:
> I have not seen any more e-mail on this. How is it going? Is there any
> chance of rolling in some corrections for the SCHED_SPORADIC treatment? In
> particular, could we have a DO_NOT_RUN priority, that is guaranteed to
> prevent a task from running at all?
Sorry for asking a maybe stupid question, but what is this good for and
what is the benefit over SIGSTOP?
Joerg
--
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