linux-kernel - Re: Stolen and degraded time and schedulers

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: <1173891595.3101.17.camel@imap.mvista.com>
Date:	Wed, 14 Mar 2007 09:59:55 -0700
From:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	cpufreq@...ts.linux.org.uk,
	Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Stolen and degraded time and schedulers

On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 09:37 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Daniel Walker wrote:
> > Then your direction is wrong, sched_clock() should be constant ideally
> > (1millisecond should really be 1millisecond). 
> 
> Rather than repeating myself, I suggest you read my original post
> again.  But my point is that "I was runnable on a cpu for 1ms of real
> time" is a meaningless measurement: you want to measure "I ran for 1
> cpu-ms", which is a unit which depends on how work a particular CPU does
> in relationship to other CPUs on the system, or even itself at some
> previous time.

I understood, I just don't agree that you suggested modification are the
correct ones to make.

> > Like I said in the last
> > email, change the scheduler to make it aware of the variable quantum
> > values.
> 
> I suppose you could, but that seems more complex.  I think you could
> encode the same information in the measurement of how much work a cpu
> actually got done while a process was scheduled on it.

I know it's more complex, but that seems more like the "right" thing to
do.

Daniel

-
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/