From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Nov 29 15:48:13 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA28127
          for current-outgoing; Sat, 29 Nov 1997 15:48:13 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current)
Received: from pop.uniserve.com (pop.uniserve.com [204.244.156.3])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA28121
          for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Sat, 29 Nov 1997 15:48:08 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from tom@uniserve.com)
Received: from shell.uniserve.com [204.244.210.252] 
	by pop.uniserve.com with smtp (Exim 1.73 #1)
	id 0xbwbt-0003jU-00; Sat, 29 Nov 1997 15:47:41 -0800
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 15:47:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom <tom@uniserve.com>
To: Andrzej Bialecki <abial@korin.warman.org.pl>
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: SMP: binding process to CPU
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.95.971129230021.25950A-100000@korin.warman.org.pl>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971129154536.14983E-100000@shell.uniserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


On Sat, 29 Nov 1997, Andrzej Bialecki wrote:

> Here's why I'm asking: I have one process which must be as near real-time
> as possible, and the second process processes it's output (which is

  Use rtprio on that process.  If the priority is high enough, the process
will pretty much hog a CPU.  This can be dangerous, as other processes
may not run at all, but on SMP there is at least one more CPU for other
processes to run on.

Tom