From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Nov 17 10: 5:28 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from shell.webmaster.com (unknown [209.133.28.73]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC03F37B479 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:05:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from whenever ([216.152.68.2]) by shell.webmaster.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-12345L500S10000V35) with SMTP id com; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:04:35 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Steve O'Hara-Smith" Cc: Subject: RE: how can I run utilities at idle time? Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:05:23 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: <20001117101506.1f26b9e5.steveo@eircom.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 16:10:05 -0800 (PST) > Doug White wrote: > > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: > > > It is trivially easy to create system-hanging deadlocks with > idprio. Use > > nice instead. If you need an example, try running setiathome at > > idprio. > > OK that's how to trigger problems. A few obvious questions > spring to mind on the > subject. Is it easy (possible) to avoid such problems ? No. > Is the > mechanism of the problem > understood (by anybody) ? Yes. Priority inversion. > Is the whole problem changed beyond > recognition with the -current > SMP changes ? I don't believe so, but I'm not sure. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message