On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 09:14:22AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > an "RT priorities rlimit" is still not adequate as a desktop solution, > because it still allows the box to be locked up. Also, if it turns out > to be a mistake then it's already codified into the ABI, while RT-LSM is > much less 'persistent' and could be replaced much easier. RT-LSM is also > more flexible and more practical. (an rlimit needs changes across a > number of userspace components, delaying its adoptation.)
Putting it into the tree means a gurantee we'll keep it going. It'd probably much better if Jack just keepts it separatly. Especially as his lack of even making it generic shows that he's unwilling to invest work into it that doesn't benfit him personally. - 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/
