linux-kernel - Re: CFS review

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]

Date:	Wed, 1 Aug 2007 18:11:59 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CFS review

On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 04:36:24PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> 
> > > jiffies based sched_clock should be soon very rare. It's probably 
> > > not worth optimizing for it.
> > 
> > I'm not so sure about that. sched_clock() has to be fast, so many 
> > archs may want to continue to use jiffies. [...]
> 
> i think Andi was talking about the vast majority of the systems out 
> there. For example, check out the arch demography of current Fedora 
> installs (according to the Smolt opt-in UUID based user metrics):

I meant that in many cases where the TSC is considered unreliable
today it'll be possible to use it anyways at least for sched_clock()
(and possibly even gtod()) 

The exception would be system which really have none, but there
should be very few of those.

-Andi
-
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/