On Thursday 04 October 2007, Jacob wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 10:29:56AM +0200, Florian Schmidt wrote: > > [...] > > And yes, i consider it a bug that top and other software report the > > SCHED_FIFO prio as negative values. Where does that come from? Does the > > prio already get listed as negative in /proc? Or do they simply do it to > > separate the SCHED_FIFO threads from SCHED_OTHER threads? Anyways POSIX > > speaks of positive SCHED_FIFO prios in the range 1..99 afaik.. > > Hmmm, POSIX talks about priorities in the range of > min .. max, > where > min = sched_get_priority_min(alg) > max = sched_get_priority_max(alg) > max - min >= 32, if alg == SCHED_FIFO or alg == SCHED_RR > and alg being the the scheduling algorithm (like SCHED_FIFO, ...) > > Under Linux (according to 'man sched_get_priority_min') the follwoing > ranges apply: > SCHED_FIFO : min = 1, max = 99 > SCHED_RR : min = 1, max = 99 > SCHED_OTHER : min = 0, max = 0 Ok thanks for clearing this up :) So in principle there actually even might be partially (or only) negative prios for SCHED_FIFO processes. Thanks, Flo -- Palimm Palimm! http://tapas.affenbande.org _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user
