linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/12] cleanup __build_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: <20090818111644.GA23983@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:16:44 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/12] cleanup __build_sched_domains()


* Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Following patches try to make __build_sched_domains() less ugly 
> and more readable. They shouldn't be harmful. Thus I think they 
> can be applied for .32.
> 
> Patches are against tip/master as of today.
> 
> FYI, I need those patches as a base for introducing a new domain 
> level for multi-node CPUs for which I intend to sent patches as 
> RFC asap.

Very nice cleanups!

Magny-Cours indeed will need one more sched-domains level, 
something like:

   [smt thread]
   core
   internal numa node
   cpu socket
   external numa node 

... which is certainly interesting, especially since the hierarchy 
possibly 'crosses', i.e. we might have the two internal numa nodes 
share a L2 or L3 cache, right?

I'd also not be surprised if the load-balancer needed some care to 
properly handle such a setup.

It's all welcome work in any case, and for .32.

	Ingo
--
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/