How can policies implemented inWindows XP lead to priority inversion? How does Windows XP handle priority inversion? In what ways is this a good policy?What are its drawbacks?
What will be an ideal response?
Windows XP does not boost the priority of a thread holding a resource for which a
higher-priority thread is waiting.This can lead to priority inversion in which a thread of priority
greater than the lower-priority thread, but less than the higher-priority thread, monopolizes
the processor.Windows XP handles this by periodically boosting the priority of threads
that have not executed for a while. This policy reduces most priority-inversion problems.
However, if the lower-priority thread does not finish using the resource before its quantum
ends, its priority is returned to its original level.The lower-priority thread might have to wait
to be boosted again to execute. This can lead to a higher-priority thread, possibly a real-time
thread, waiting for a long period of time because of a medium-priority dynamic thread.
You might also like to view...
Which of the following is NOT a button on the navigation toolbar?
(A) Current position (B) Add new (C) Find (D) Delete
If you press and hold [Shift] while creating a rectangle, you can constrain the shape to a perfect square.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
A(n) ____________________ is a motion you make on a touch screen with the tip of one or more fingers or your hand.
Fill in the blank(s) with the appropriate word(s).
A(n) ________ is a collection of related records.
A. attribute B. table C. field D. entity