8 Apr
2005
8 Apr
'05
5:47 p.m.
On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 14:31 -0500, Jack O'Quin wrote:
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
<nando(a)ccrma.stanford.edu> writes:
Actually it appears that both solutions are in -mm now:
http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.12-rc2/2.6.1…
http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.12-rc2/2.6.1…
Hmmm, I'm getting really confused, I thought
that the realtime lsm was
the one that was in 'mm (maybe none of them are?). Finally I found the
followup article on lwn that mentioned this:
http://lwn.net/Articles/121887/
"...The end result is that the rlimit patch has come back out of -mm..."
Maybe it was put back again afterwards? (this was reported on February
10). Hard to follow all that's happening...
Difficult and frustrating.
The kernel developers have decided not to merge the realtime-lsm,
after all. Instead, they propose an rlimits extension for granting
per-user realtime scheduling privileges. This does (barely) meet our
minimum needs.
It is inferior to the realtime-lsm solution for
several reasons I feel
too tired and discouraged to repeat again here.
I agree with Jack's general assessment of the situation, especially
regarding a few arrogant individuals giving the kernel developers a bad
rap, however I can understand their reluctance to merge it.
It's a tough call because although the LSM approach clearly is more
immediately user friendly, the nice and RT prio limits are a better
designed solution. If your distro sets everything up right (a big if),
either way it will just work.
Really it looks like the jury is still out. But good luck finding
*anyone* willing to take up the issue on LKML. We are all fed up.
Lee