linux-kernel - Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair

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

Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2007 17:38:47 +0300
From:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
To:	Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair

Peter Williams wrote:
> Al Boldi wrote:
> > Reducing the prio-level granularity may also be helpful;
>
> Because of some of the bit operations code makes it a bad idea to have
> more than 160 priority levels, you're more or less limited to 60
> priority levels for SCHED_OTHER tasks (as 100 are used for real time)
> and you need 40 of these to pay some attention to niceness leaving you
> about 20 priority levels to use for fiddling.  Is that enough?
>
> With spa_ebs (now that CPU rate caps have been removed), you have all 60
> priorities available for fiddling with as niceness is taken care of when
> calculating each task's entitlement.

Ok, increasing the number of prio-levels is one thing, but I was more 
thinking of reducing the effective difference between each prio-level. For 
example, this would allow max_tpt_bonus=18, while the effective range would 
be 3, thus reducing granularity.  Would this be easily introduceable?


Thanks!

--
Al

-
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/