mà den 14.03.2005 Klokka 13:43 (-0800) skreiv Matt Mackall:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:14:17AM +0100, Vegard Lima wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > in the long thread on "[request for inclusion] Realtime LSM" there
> > doesn't appear to be too many people who has actually tested the
> > nice-and-rt-prio-rlimits.patch. Well, it works for me...
> >
> > However, the patch to pam_limits posted here:
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/1/14/174
> > is a little bit aggressive on the semi-colon side.
>
> It would be more helpful if you pointed out the exact bug. But I think
> I spotted the bug in question the first time around.
Sorry, the incremental patch looks like this
--- Linux-PAM-0.77/modules/pam_limits/pam_limits.c-rtprio 2005-03-15
00:04:30.000000000 +0100
+++ Linux-PAM-0.77/modules/pam_limits/pam_limits.c 2005-03-15
00:04:58.000000000 +0100
@@ -370,16 +370,15 @@
limit_value *= 1024;
break;
case RLIMIT_NICE:
- limit_value = 19 - limit_value;
if (limit_value > 39)
limit_value = 39;
- if (limit_value < 0);
+ if (limit_value < 0)
limit_value = 0;
break;
case RLIMIT_RTPRIO:
if (limit_value > 99)
limit_value = 99;
- if (limit_value < 0);
+ if (limit_value < 0)
limit_value = 0;
break;
}
The conversion
limit_value = 19 - limit_value;
takes place in can_nice() in kernel/schec.c and had to be removed.
> Please double-check and test this patch from -mm, which will likely
> show up in mainline:
>
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.11/2.6.11-mm3/broken-out/nice-and-rt-prio-rlimits.patch
Sound good.
I've tested with both 2.6.11-mm3 and 2.6.11-bk10 + patch above.
jackd starts OK with realtime scheduling and playing with nice seems OK
when I have positive values for "rt_priority" and "nice" in limits.conf.
Thanks,
--
Vegard Lima
-
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/
