linux-kernel - [RFC PATCH 0/2] use virtual time for CFS on s390

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:02:08 +0200
From:	Jan Glauber <jang@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Martin Schwidefksy <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/2] use virtual time for CFS on s390

Hi Ingo,

an outcome from the previous discussion about a virtual sched_clock() on s390
was that scheduler_tick() should also be called based on virtual time.
The second patch changes the scheduler_tick() call to only happen after a tick
passed for the virtual cpu.

The patches cause nothing obvious to break, numbers from top look sane but 
I've seen something strange...

For a simple make -j6 workload top reports processes very often to be in 
state <defunct>. Thats' not terribly wrong since this can happens also 
without the patches but I wonder if this indicates that the scheduler behaves
badly and does less often schedule the parent processes that gathers the 
waiting zombie processes?

Are there any indicators in the sched_debug output that I could look for?

Jan

-
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/