linux-kernel - Re: fair group scheduler not so fair?

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]

Date:	Fri, 30 May 2008 12:13:24 +0530
From:	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>
Cc:	vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, pj@....com,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
	aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: fair group scheduler not so fair?

> Also, although the long-term results are good, the shorter-term fairness 
> isn't great.  Is there a tuneable that would allow for a tradeoff between 
> performance and fairness?  I have people that are looking for within 4% 
> fairness over a 1sec interval.
>

How fair does smp fairness look for a !group scenario? I don't expect
group schould be able to do much better.

-- 
regards,
Dhaval
--
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/