linux-kernel - Re: BFS v0.311 CPU scheduler for 2.6.32

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: <hfufos$1uj$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date:	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:06:12 -0500
From:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject:  Re: BFS v0.311 CPU scheduler for 2.6.32

Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 01:10:39 Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> Could you make the scheduler build time configurable instead of replacing
>> the existing one? Embedded folks in particular may love a low footprint
>> scheduler.
>>
> 
> It's not a bad idea, but the kernel still needs to be patched either way. To 
> get BFS they'd need to patch the kernel. If they didn't want BFS, they 
> wouldn't patch it in the first place.
> 
The advantage would be that the same kernel source could then be built into a 
custom version with only the config changed.Since building with various configs 
is hardly unusual it would save some carrying of multiple sources, for those who 
build for several uses already.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot

--
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/