On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 22:41 -0500, Paul Davis wrote: > [ the best solution is .... ] > > [ my preferred solution is ... ] > > [ it would be better if ... ] > > [ this is a kludge and it should be done instead like ... ] > > did nobody read what andrew wrote and what JOQ pointed out? > > after weeks of debating this, no other conceptual solution emerged > that did not have at least as many problems as the RT LSM module, and > all other proposed solutions were also more invasive of other aspects > of kernel design and operations than RT LSM is. >
Sure, it is quick and easy. Suits some. At least I do prefer this to altering the semantics of realtime scheduling. I can't say much about it because I'm not putting my hand up to do anything. Just mentioning that rlimit would be better if not for the userspace side of the equation. I think most were already agreed on that point anyway though. Nick - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
