More ULE bugs fixed.

[David O'Brien]

On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 12:33:48AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> I think the existence of rtprio and a non-broken idprio makes infinite
> deprioritization using niceness unnecessary.  (idprio is still broken
> (not available to users) in -current, but it doesn't need to be if
> priority propagation is working as it should be.)  It's safer and fairer
> for all niced processes to not completely prevent each other being
> scheduled, and use the special scheduling classes for cases where this
> is not wanted.  I'd mainly like the slices for nice -20 vs nice --20
> processes to be very small and/or infrequent.

I agree.  With idprio, there is no need for a special nice value that is
handled outside the normal rules of "nice".  I always thought that a wart
after using Irix which has a working idprio.
 
-- 
-- David  (obrien at FreeBSD.org)