linux-kernel - Re: massive_intr on CFS, BFS, and EDF

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]

Date:	Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:31:58 -0600
From:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To:	Michael Trimarchi <trimarchi@...dalf.sssup.it>
CC:	sat <takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Raistlin <raistlin@...ux.it>
Subject: Re: massive_intr on CFS, BFS, and EDF

On 09/25/2009 10:07 AM, Michael Trimarchi wrote:
> It is important to note that
> the expected behavior of an edf scheduler is *not* a fair one. It has to
> do its best to guarantee the deadlines of the admitted tasks.

Do you allow oversubscription with EDF?  It would seem so based on these
results.  Would it maybe make sense to disallow oversubscription, or
make it an option?

If you have massive oversubscription with EDF, what is the design
intent?  Do you try to meet the goals on as many tasks as possible,
while the oversubscribed tasks get nothing?

Chris

--
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/