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: <20070531040926.GH6909@holomorphy.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 May 2007 21:09:26 -0700
From:	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
To:	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
	efault@....de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tingy@...umass.edu,
	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>, kernel@...ivas.org,
	tong.n.li@...el.com, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@...oo.fr>
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 0/3] Add group fairness to CFS

On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 01:13:59PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> The step beyond was to show how nice numbers can be done with all that
>> hierarchical task grouping so they have global effects instead of
>> effects limited to the scope of the narrowest grouping hierarchy
>> containing the task. I had actually assumed the weighting and
>> flattening bits were already in your plans from some other post you
>> made and was building upon that.

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 08:56:57AM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> I would definitely be willing to try out any experiments you think of,
> esp those that allow the hierarchy to be flattened. atm fair_key
> calculation (in the context of cfs) seem to be the biggest challenge to 
> surmount for this to work.

It's not all that tricky. The ->fair_key computations are already
parametrized on load weights. The "task weights" here are just what
Linux calls "load weight," so we're largely done once task weights
are calculated.

The tricky part (if any) is essentially what you've already got nailed
down, that is, creating and manipulating the accounting objects for the
task groups or whatever you're calling them.


-- wli
-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ