Re: [LAU] A surprisingly stupid RT priority question

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Paul Davis <paul@...>
Cc: linux-audio-user <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Saturday, December 8, 2012 - 7:20 pm

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Paul Davis wrote:

I know that's your stock answer whenever someone mentions nice, but if
the OP is talking about SCHED_OTHER processes, nice does play a role.

But if the OP really wants to play with fire, try "chrt". Keep a
shell open with higher priority in case the process never blocks, so
you can kill it. "taskset" might also be useful for multicore
machines.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] A surprisingly stupid RT priority question, Ken Restivo, (Sun Dec 2, 9:01 pm)
Re: [LAU] A surprisingly stupid RT priority question, Paul Coccoli, (Sat Dec 8, 7:20 pm)
Re: [LAU] A surprisingly stupid RT priority question, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas, (Sun Dec 2, 10:04 pm)
Re: [LAU] A surprisingly stupid RT priority question, Ken Restivo, (Mon Dec 3, 2:27 am)
Re: [LAU] A surprisingly stupid RT priority question, Aaron Krister Johnson, (Mon Dec 3, 4:48 pm)
Re: [LAU] A surprisingly stupid RT priority question, Harry van Haaren, (Sun Dec 2, 9:23 pm)