linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP

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: <456EAD6E.6040709@yahoo.com.au>
Date:	Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:07:42 +1100
From:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	wenji@...l.gov, akpm@...l.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP

Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 08:35:04AM +0100, Ingo Molnar (mingo@...e.hu) wrote:

> Doesn't the provided solution is just a in-kernel variant of the
> SCHED_FIFO set from userspace? Why kernel should be able to mark some
> users as having higher priority?
> What if workload of the system is targeted to not the maximum TCP
> performance, but maximum other-task performance, which will be broken
> with provided patch.

David's line of thinking for a solution sounds better to me. This patch
does not prevent the process from being preempted (for potentially a long
time), by any means.

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
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/