linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Scheduler: Improving the scheduler performance.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 08 Apr 2007 22:12:17 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
CC:	root <swordfish@...tbd.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Scheduler: Improving the scheduler performance.

Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Apr 2007 23:42:20 +0600, root said:
> 
>> As we know that, linux scheduler use separate runqueue for every CPU of
>> a multiprocessor system, which having an active and an expired array.If
>> we use only one expired array, then the CPUs of a multiprocessor system
>> will be able to share their expired task via the accumulated expired
>> array,
> 
> I got this far, and the first thought that popped into my head was:
> 
> "Wow.  This might actually win on a UP or small MP (2-15 CPU).  But the
> lock contention on a big 512-CPU machoflops box is likely going to *suck*".
> 
> For that matter, my quick eyeballing of the code, although it doesn't *find*
> any race conditions, doesn't convince me there's any protection taken to make
> sure there aren't any.  Is there some subtle algorithmic trick I'm missing
> to ensure Nothing Bad Can Happen?

Lock contention is going to be the least of your worries.

Destroying CPU affinity is the big one I suspect.

-- 
Politics is the struggle between those who want to make their country
the best in the world, and those who believe it already is.  Each group
calls the other unpatriotic.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/