linux-kernel - Re: [ISSUE] sched/cgroup: Does cpu-cgroup still works fine nowadays?

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, 16 May 2014 09:54:21 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Michael wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...aro.org>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [ISSUE] sched/cgroup: Does cpu-cgroup still works fine nowadays?

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:24:35PM +0800, Michael wang wrote:
> Hey, Mike :)
> 
> On 05/16/2014 10:51 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 10:23 +0800, Michael wang wrote:
> > 
> >> But we found that one difference when group get deeper is the tasks of
> >> that group become to gathered on CPU more often, some time all the
> >> dbench instances was running on the same CPU, this won't happen for l1
> >> group, may could explain why dbench could not get CPU more than 100% any
> >> more.
> > 
> > Right.  I played a little (sane groups), saw load balancing as well.
> 
> Yeah, now we found that even l2 groups will face the same issue, allow
> me to re-list the details here:

Hmm, that _should_ more or less work and does indeed suggest there's
something iffy.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped