Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx> wrote: > Well, it adds overhead. The main question is whether this kind of > optimization is necessary at all. As François already mentioned > threads > that need very low latencies (and don't do much work) just get a high > priority. Analogously worker threads should be given priorities lower > than > B_NORMAL_PRIORITY. IMHO when these simple rules are respected a > relatively > fair scheduler would automatically schedule threads in such a way > that the > interactive user experience is just fine. > > Interactions with Haiku's GUI involve quite a few threads that mostly > communicate via messaging. I wouldn't be much surprised if I'd be > told that > most of those threads most of the time don't use their full quantum > before > they have to wait for a lock or the next message. To me keeping > scheduling > paths short seems to be the best best way to ensure low latencies. [...] > To be honest, I'm very sceptical whether this kind of optimization is > really useful. As I already always said when this topic came up before: +1 Bye, Axel.