[vdr] Re: Kernel-Patch to make VDR undisturbable

[Andreas Schultz <aschultz@cs.uni-magdeburg.de>]

Hi Matthias,

On Friday 05 April 2002 14:01, Matthias Lötzke wrote:
> Thomas Koch (tom@harhar.net) schrieb:
> > Is there any difference to "nice -19 /path/to/vdr"?
>
> Yes, there is a huge difference! "nice" only changes the lenght of time the
> programm could get the CPU. A higher scheduling priority is a side-effect,
> but this does not make sure that the process gets the CPU whenever he needs
> it.
>
> My scheduling method does that. With this kernel-patch the scheduling of
> VDR is (nearly) independent of any other task. That means VDR can not be
> disturbed by other programms (even if there are lots of CPU- or I/O intense
> processes).

I don't think patching the kernel is the right way to go. Besides, you should 
be able to achive the same thing by using real time scheduling priorities and 
policy. SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR should do the same thing without the kernel 
patch.


Andreas