| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.0906161122380.31685@twin.jikos.cz> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:24:19 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz> To: Bruno Bauer <bgbauer@...il.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Scheduler and SMP On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Bruno Bauer wrote: > I'm new in kernel development and i be making tests in scheduler for a > study course. I guess kernelnewbies malinglist would be more appropriate for you than lkml. > I created a new syscall that set a task for no migrate from cpu (I added > a new flag no_migrate on task_struct). Why didn't you use existing infrastructure (sched_setaffinity()) for that? > In my tests, a tar/bzip task with no_migrate flag seted run at 5% more > fast. > How do this be explained? Overhead of migration? Probably. Depends on the exact changes you have made, which you haven't shared with us. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists