linux-kernel - Re: SCHED_FIFO and SCHED

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: <1219060315.10800.338.camel@twins>
Date:	Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:51:55 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc:	"Torvalds, Linus" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR broken by cfs

On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 21:24 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:

> Really, you think the enterprise distros will willingly break POSIX
> and their own backwards compatiblity by default? I wouldn't have
> thought so, but anyway I guess they are free to make that choice, so
> where's the problem?

I'm not seeing why you're making such a big fuss over this - IMO its not
such a significant breakage. Esp since very few realtime apps will
require such large amounts of time to ever run into the throttle.

If their usage is 95%+ cpu they must have magic WCET estamates - or like
in this case, be a benchmark app which IMHO just abuses the real-time
class.

It's like running your real-time code on a 5% slower cpu - if it runs
correctly on the 5% slower cpu, it will run correctly here too.

Note that correctness from a RT pov is making your deadline.

--
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/