| 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: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 18:52:34 +0600 From: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@...il.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: SCHED: Is task migration necessary in sched_exec(). On 12/23/09, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 18:04 +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote: > > On 12/23/09, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 17:35 +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote: > > So its a win, right? > Yes - a fair win. But if load balancer moves other tasks from the runqueue (2nd or 3rd task from your ex.) and thats how we also can achive 1/2 of cpu1's time , right? Those waiting tasks could have effective 0 cache footprint too. If they were not run before - right? > > -- 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