linux-kernel - Re: sched_yield: delete sysctl_sched_compat

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: <20071203214803.GA8989@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 3 Dec 2007 22:48:03 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>
Cc:	Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>, davids@...master.com,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: sched_yield: delete sysctl_sched_compat_yield


* Mark Lord <lkml@....ca> wrote:

> That's not the same thing at all. I think that David is suggesting 
> that the reinsertion logic should pretend that the task used up all of 
> the CPU time it was offered in the slot leading up to the 
> sched_yield() call.

we have tried this too, and this has problems too (artificial inflation 
of the vruntime metric and a domino effects on other portions of the 
scheduler). So this is a worse solution than what we have now. (and this 
has all been pointed out in past discussions in which David 
participated. I'll certainly reply to any genuinely new idea.)

	Ingo
--
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/