On Jan 6, 2011, at 2:41 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
> On Fri Jan 7 11, Anonymous wrote:
>> Alexander Best <arun...@freebsd.org> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu Jan 6 11, John Baldwin wrote:
>>>> Note that that usage is rather pointless since it means you apply rtprio
>>>> to
>>>> the 'rtprio' process that is about to exit. :)
>>>
>>> yeah but at least it makes the usage of -X consistent. ;) also consider the
>>> following: the current shell has idle priority and you want to run rtprio in
>>> normal priority. then rtprio -t -0 would be a neat way of doing
>>> rtprio -t rtprio. ;) wel...not quite, because the priotity gets set to
>>> "NORMAL"
>>> when rtprio is almost finished running. ;)
>>
>> I think it'd be useful if the syntax allowed smth like
>>
>> $ rtprio 1 -0 -111 -222 -333 -444 -555 ...
>
> defenately, but that would require quite some code. also please bear in mind:
> in its current form rtprio *DOES* process -0. my code doesn't change that. the
> only thing that it changes is that before hand -0 was processed *AND* then
> also
> executed. now the execution doesn't take place.
Same thing, no code change:
sh -c 'for i in 1 -0 -111 -222 -333 -444 -555; do rtprio $i; done'
Yes, there's more of a processing cost to doing it this way with
exec/fork jazz and shell logic -- but how often do you execute rtprio, and is
the required code change really necessary? Simple is better in my book.
Thanks,
-Garrett_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
