linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] reduce runqueue lock contention

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:	Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:10:57 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, tglx <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] reduce runqueue lock contention

On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 23:11 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > So this one boots and builds a kernel on a dual-socket nehalem.
> > 
> > there's still quite a number of XXXs to fix, but I don't think any of the 
> > races are crashing potential, mostly wrong accounting and scheduling iffies 
> > like.
> > 
> > But give it a go.. see what it does for you (x86 only for now).
> > 
> > Ingo, any comments other than, eew, scary? :-)
> 
> None, other than a question: which future kernel do you aim it for? I'd prefer 
> v2.6.50 or later ;-)

Well, assuming it all works out and actually reduces runqueue lock
contention we still need to sort out all those XXXs in there, I'd say at
the soonest somewhere near .38/.39 or so.

Its definitely not something we should rush in.
--
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/