linux-kernel - Re: regression introduced by - timers: fix itimer/many thread hang

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 11 Nov 2008 01:20:03 +0100
From:	Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@...eria.de>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@...gle.com>,
	Doug Chapman <doug.chapman@...com>, mingo@...e.hu,
	roland@...hat.com, adobriyan@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: regression introduced by - timers: fix itimer/many thread hang

On Monday 10 November 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> The detail I've not looked at is, if when this itimer is indeed active
> and we are running 256 threads of the same application on all cpus do we
> then do the per-cpu loop for each tick on each cpu?

Can't this kind of aggregation not be done in a tree-like manner?

I mean these CPUs are not on the same node, right?


Best Regards

Ingo Oeser
--
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/