| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 08:51:57 +1100 From: Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.21-rc1: known regressions (v2) (part 2) On Friday 02 March 2007 00:30, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org> wrote: > > [...] Even though I'm finding myself defending code that has already > > been softly tagged for redundancy, let's be clear here; we're talking > > about at most a further 70ms delay in scheduling a niced task in the > > presence of a nice 0 task, which is a reasonable delay for ksoftirqd > > which we nice the eyeballs out of in mainline. Considering under load > > our scheduler has been known to cause scheduling delays of 10 seconds > > I still don't see this as a bug. Dynticks just "points it out to us". > > well, not running softirqs when we could is a bug. It's not a big bug, > but it's a bug nevertheless. It doesnt matter that softirqs could be > delayed even worse under high load - there was no 'high load' here. Gotcha. I'll prepare a smt-nice removal patch shortly. -- -ck - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists