linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: idle: Add sched balance option

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:	Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:28:19 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: idle: Add sched balance option

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:09:20PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> I agree a numerical value is not flexible. But it sounds weird to put a
> scheduler option in the sysfs and maybe more options will follow.
> 
> I am wondering if we shouldn't create a new cgroup for 'energy' and put
> everything in there. So we will have more flexibility for extension and we
> will be able to create a group of tasks for performance and a group of tasks
> for energy saving.
> 
> Does it make sense ?

The old knobs used to live here:

-What:          /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_mc_power_savings
-               /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_smt_power_savings

Not entirely sure that's a fine place, but it has precedent.
--
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/