Subject: Re: scheduler woes on MPACPI kernel
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Wolfgang S. Rupprecht <wolfgang+gnus20050118T054823@dailyplanet.dontspam.wsrcc.com>
Date: 01/18/2005 06:20:23
Thomas Bieg <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Two things I'd like to note here:
> 1. If you're really nice-ing your make process(es) to -20 (minus 20)
> you're actually doing the exact opposite of what you wanted to do.
I think we are talking about the same thing. From a section of my
.bashrc that hasn't been touched for quite a long time:
alias make='nice -20 make'
The niceness polarity is such that the make is disadvantaged.
> 2. If your machine is not a real multi-processor machine (with
> more than one physical CPU) but one of those "hyper-threading"-
> enabled P4s, then the scheduler may not quite get things right.
The machine is a crappy uniprocessor. I just wanted to run a
well-tested ACPI configuration and GENERIC.MPACPI was the only one I
saw. It wasn't clear what bits I could turn off to create a fully
functional uniprocessor ACPI kernel.
Just to explain why I'm bothering with ACPI; I'm setting up a system
that will eventually be used by a very non-technical person. I'd
really like to intercept the front-pannel power and reset buttons so I
can do a clean shutdown and have one less thing to worry about.
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht http://www.wsrcc.com/wolfgang/
Hate software patents? Sign here: http://thankpoland.info/