linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [PATCH] cpuset: fix wrong calculation of relax domain level

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: <488001BF.1070006@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:36:47 +0800
From:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
CC:	seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	menage@...gle.com, peterz@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] cpuset: fix wrong calculation of relax domain level

Paul Jackson wrote:
> Li Zefan wrote:
>> When multiple cpusets are overlapping in their 'cpus' and hence they
>> form a single sched domain, the largest sched_relax_domain_level among
>> those should be used. But when top_cpuset's sched_load_balance is
>> set, its sched_relax_domain_level is used regardless other sub-cpusets'.
> 
> This code has gotten too complicated for my modest brain ;).
> 
> Question:
> 
>     In the case that the top_cpuset's sched_load_balance is -not- set,
>     is there code already present that sets the sched_relax_domain_level
>     in overlapping cpusets to the largest value in any of the overlapping
>     cpusets?
> 
>     If so, where is that code?
> 

It was your idea to use the largest sched_load_balance for overlapping cpusets.
;)

--
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/