linux-kernel - Re: [patch] sched: decrease number of load balances

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611201734490.24998@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:39:42 -0800 (PST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
cc:	mingo@...e.hu, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, akpm@...l.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kenneth.w.chen@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch] sched: decrease number of load balances

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006, Siddha, Suresh B wrote:

> My patch is not changing any idle load balancing logic and hence it is no
> less/more aggressive as the current one.

But you cannot do anything in addition to idle balancing. You can only 
draw a process to the cpu you are balancing on. And we are already doing 
that. So this cuts down the frequency of idle balance? And only the first 
idle processor of a group of idle processors does balancing?
-
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/