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, 17 Oct 2016 10:25:03 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...up.it>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
        giuseppe lipari <giuseppe.lipari@....ens-cachan.fr>,
        Claudio Scordino <claudio@...dence.eu.com>
Subject: Re: About group scheduling for SCHED_DEADLINE

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 08:38:57AM +0200, luca abeni wrote:

> > Yes, there currently is no existing schedulability analysis for
> > multi-processor EDF with random affinities (as far as I know)
> Correction: it looks like I was wrong, and the schedulability of
> multi-processor EDF with arbitrary affinities has already been analysed
> in
> A. Gujarati, F. Cerqueira, and B. Brandenburg, “Multiprocessor
> Real-Time Scheduling with Arbitrary Processor Affinities: From Practice
> to Theory”, Real- Time Systems, Volume 51, Issue 4, pp. 440–483.
> Springer Verlag, 2015
> (see https://www.mpi-sws.org/~bbb/papers/).
> 
> Thanks to Giuseppe Lipari for pointing me to this paper.

Ooh, shiny. Let me go read that.

> So, having DL tasks with arbitrary affinities is not a big problem from
> the theoretical point of view... The only issue is that the
> utilisation-based admission test that is currently implemented in the
> kernel does not work (and given the complexity of the analysis I think
> it is better not to perform it in the kernel :)

So the problem with doing admission control out of the kernel is that
then all the guarantees and resource control the kernel should provide
are out the window, and we're back to all the reasons why SCHED_FIFO is
a horrible horrible scheduling policy.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ