linux-kernel - Re: RT sched: cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root

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: <20081104144549.GC30855@sgi.com>
Date:	Tue, 4 Nov 2008 08:45:49 -0600
From:	Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: RT sched: cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root_domain and no load balance

On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 03:36:33PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Or are folks disabling load-balance bottom-up, instead of top-down?
> 
> In that case, I think we should dis-allow that.

If what you mean by "disabling load-balance bottom-up" is disabling
load-balance in the root cpuset before disabling it in the leaves,
in the end it does not matter which way you do it, the setup winds up
being the same.
--
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/