linux-kernel - Re: Network slowdown due to CFS

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: <47012696.2010606@nortel.com>
Date:	Mon, 01 Oct 2007 10:55:50 -0600
From:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	David Schwartz <davids@...master.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Martin Michlmayr <tbm@...ius.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Network slowdown due to CFS

Ingo Molnar wrote:

> But, because you assert it that it's risky to "criticise sched_yield() 
> too much", you sure must know at least one real example where it's right 
> to use it (and cite the line and code where it's used, with 
> specificity)?

It's fine to criticise sched_yield().  I agree that new apps should 
generally be written to use proper completion mechanisms or to wait for 
specific events.

However, there are closed-source and/or frozen-source apps where it's 
not practical to rewrite or rebuild the app.  Does it make sense to 
break the behaviour of all of these?

Chris
-
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/