| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <C448672F.1E24B%brian@visionpro.com> Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 08:15:43 -0700 From: Brian McGrew <brian@...ionpro.com> To: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Two questions about scheduling and threading. We're using the 2.6.16.16 kernel in an almost real time, multi processor and multi threaded environment. When I start my system for the first time, I start one thread for each processor/core in the machine (is this the correct thing to do)? These threads set a busy flag, go to work and then go to sleep. I put everything to sleep as opposed to killing the threads because it saves me on average of about 400ms each time around. My problem is, and, it is very reproducable, that if CPU0 is at 100%, none of my threads see the wakeup! It doesn't matter what the other CPU's are doing, if they're all at 0 or 100%, but if CPU0 is 100, I'm toast. Is there anyway around this? Also, I know that we're supposed to sit back and let the scheduler do all the work for us; but, in the 2.6.16.16 kernel, is there a way to assign a specific thread and/or process to a designated processor??? I really need to be able to do this because even with the preemptive scheduling, I'm still real-time and it's not quite real-time enough! Thanks! -brian -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists