linux-kernel - Re: Scheduler RR, first time slice wrong?

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:	Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:31:02 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@...eria.de>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andreas Huber <andreas.huber@...mile.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Scheduler RR, first time slice wrong?

On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 10:19 +0100, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Thursday 06 November 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Currently we inherit the RR time-slice from our parent. In case that is
> > init we inherit the 1s value set by default, in case its an already
> > running RR task, we inherit whatever is left.
> > 
> > Fix both these by resetting the time-slice on fork.
> 
> I remember that this MIGHT be on purpose to mitigate fork bombs.
> 
> Behaviour was, that you could starve others, if you fork, 
> do little or no work and fork again before your timeslice is over.
> 
> But I'm not sure this applies here...

Right, RT tasks have it easy starving stuff ;-)



--
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/