| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:37:48 -0400 From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com> To: Mark Lord <lkml@....ca> CC: Buytaert_Steven@....com, andi@...stfloor.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: sched_yield proposals/rationale Mark Lord wrote: > Buytaert_Steven@....com wrote: >>> From: Bill Davidsen >>> >>> And having gotten same, are you going to code up what appears to be a >>> solution, based on this feedback? >> >> The feedback was helpful in verifying whether there are any arguments >> against my approach. The real proof is in the pudding. >> >> I'm running a kernel with these changes, as we speak. Overall system >> throughput is about up 20%. With 'system throughput' I mean measured >> performance of a rather large (experimental) system. The patch isn't >> even 24h old... Also the application latency has improved. > > Cool. You *do know* that there is a brand new CPU scheduler > scheduled to replace the current one for the 2.6.22 Kernel, right? > Having tried both nicksched and Con's fair sched on some normal loads, as opposed to benchmarks, I sure hope Linus changes his mind about having several schedulers in the kernel. The "one perfect and self-adjusting scheduler" isn't here yet. -- Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com> "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists