linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix longstanding load balancing bug in the scheduler V2

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]

Message-Id: <20060914172617.fc8aef2b.akpm@osdl.org>
Date:	Thu, 14 Sep 2006 17:26:17 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <christoph@....com>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix longstanding load balancing bug in the scheduler V2

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:37:55 -0700 (PDT)
Christoph Lameter <christoph@....com> wrote:

> Fix longstanding load balancing bug in the scheduler V2.
> 
> AFAIK this is an important scheduler bug that needs to go 
> into 2.6.18 and all stable release since the issue can stall the 
> scheduler for good.

The timing is of course problematic.  One approach could be to merge it
into 2.6.19-early, backport into 2.6.18.x after a few weeks.  I don't know
if that's a lot better, really - it's unlikely that anyone will be running
serious performance testing against 2.6.19-rc1 or -rc2.

I'm struggling to understand how serious this really is - if the bug is
"longstanding" then very few machines must be encountering it?
-
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/