linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched: sync with the cfs

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:	Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:15:28 +0800
From:	Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To:	Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, mingo@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: sync with the cfs_rq when changing sched class

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 05:21:27PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> 
> yuyang said that switched_to don't need to consider task's load because it
> can have meaningless value. but i think considering task's load is better
> than leaving it unattended at all. and we can also use switched_to if we 
> consider task's load in switched_to.

when did I say "don't need to consider..."?

Doing more does not mean better, or just trivial. BTW, the task switched_to
does not have to be switched_from before. 
--
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/