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:	Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:42:30 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Scheduler regression: Too frequent timer interrupts(?)

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> This has never been true afaikt, as long as we have a task running, we
> take the interrupt, I just looked at the .22 code and that certainly
> expects the scheduler_tick() to be called when there is a running
> process.
>
> Also, look at /proc/interrupts if you want to determine interrupt
> frequency.

I am mainly interested in limited the number and length of cpu holdoffs.

If the timer interrupt is always taken then it must take less than 1 usec
in certain versions of the kernel in order to not show up in the
statistics gathered.


--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ