control groups

Thiago Macieira thiago at
Wed Apr 11 14:20:57 PDT 2012

On quarta-feira, 11 de abril de 2012 09.49.49, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> If you were to split the system into "dbus-daemon" and "everything
> else" and say that when both need CPU, the CPU should be divided
> equally between those two groups, I wonder if that would solve the
> scheduling problem. I don't know if it's possible.

I think it makes sense: if D-Bus is used as a communication mechanism between 
two apps, it should get as much opportunity to handle its input as those two 
are generating data for the daemon.

I'm not sure we need to do an equal division of CPU time, though. In fact, 
wouldn't it suffice to ensure that the daemon has a higher priority?

Also, I imagine that the applications need more CPU time between messages than 
the daemon, so even if it had an less than equal share compared to the 
senders, it should still suffice.

I still need to RTFP though....
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) - thiago (AT)
   Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
      PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
      E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the dbus mailing list