linux-kernel - Re: Network slowdown due to CFS

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:	Thu, 04 Oct 2007 01:33:52 -0400
From:	Casey Dahlin <cjdahlin@...u.edu>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>,
	David Schwartz <davids@...master.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Network slowdown due to CFS

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl> wrote:
>   
>> [...] (Btw, in -rc8-mm2 I see new sched_slice() function which seems 
>> to return... time.)
>>     
>
> wrong again. That is a function, not a variable to be cleared.

It still gives us a target time, so could we not simply have sched_yield 
put the thread completely to sleep for the given amount of time? It 
wholly redefines the operation, and its far more expensive (now there's 
a whole new timer involved) but it might emulate the expected behavior. 
Its hideous, but so is sched_yield in the first place, so why not?

--CJD
-
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/