linux-kernel - Re: deadline unfairness

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: <alpine.LNX.1.00.0803230037240.28078@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
Date:	Sun, 23 Mar 2008 00:38:44 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
To:	Bernd Schubert <bernd-schubert@....de>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: deadline unfairness


On Mar 22 2008 12:25, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>
> some it seems the deadline scheduler is rather unfair. Below is an example
> of md-raid6 initialization of md3, md4 and md5. All three md-devices
> do share the same blockdevices (we have patched md to allow
> parallel rebuild of shared block devices, since for us the cpu is the
> bottleneck and not the block device).

Could you share this patch? It would be really intersting for use
with fast based block devices (flash, ramdisk, and such)!

--
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/