linux-kernel - Re: Definition of fairness (was Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v11)

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: <20070510164158.GB9173@in.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2007 22:11:58 +0530
From:	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>
To:	"Dmitry Adamushko" <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
Cc:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, "Con Kolivas" <kernel@...ivas.org>,
	"Mike Galbraith" <efault@....de>,
	"Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Definition of fairness (was Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v11)

On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:24:17PM +0200, Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> One quick observation.
> 
> Isn't it important for both processes to have the same "loops_per_ms" value?

Good catch.

I have modified the testcase based on this observation (using
setitimer).

-- 
Regards,
vatsa

View attachment "cpuhog.c" of type "text/plain" (1765 bytes)