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:	Fri, 3 Aug 2007 01:23:04 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CFS review

Hi,

On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> So I think it would be entirely appropriate to
> 
>  - do something that *approximates* microseconds.
> 
>    Using microseconds instead of nanoseconds would likely allow us to do 
>    32-bit arithmetic in more areas, without any real overflow.

The basic problem is that one needs a number of bits (at least 16) for 
normalization, which limits the time range one can work with. This means 
that 32 bit leaves only room for 1 millisecond resolution, the remainder 
could maybe saved and reused later.
So AFAICT using micro- or nanosecond resolution doesn't make much 
computational difference.

bye, Roman
-
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/