linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Hookup group-scheduler with task container infrastructure

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:	Tue, 11 Sep 2007 21:21:19 +0530
From:	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc:	Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	containers@...ts.osdl.org,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hookup group-scheduler with task container infrastructure

On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 08:22:43AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> That looks odd, like it's a filesystem.
> What does cfs really mean?

cfs = completely fair scheduler :)

In this thread, we are talking of hooking the cfs cpu scheduler with the
task-container framework in -mm tree, so that the scheduler can deal
with groups of tasks rather than just tasks, while handling fairness of
cpu allocation.

I agree "cfs" control subsystem does look odd a bit here. "cpu" control
subsystem seems better.

-- 
Regards,
vatsa
-
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/