linux-kernel - Re: scheduler vs hardware? (was Re: another i7 (linux) bug?)

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: <1264144758.8074.22.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date:	Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:19:18 +0100
From:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To:	Luca Zini <luca.zini@...il.com>
Cc:	aagaande@...il.com, rdelcueto@...mail.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>
Subject: Re: scheduler vs hardware? (was Re: another i7  (linux) bug?)

> if I run a cpu intensive process with the lowest priority (19
> from man nice) I obtain much better performance that with the
> highest priority available (-20 from man nice).
>
> For example the same file is processed by lame in 8.7 seconds
> at the lowest priority, and in 12 seconds at the highest
> priority.  Before posting a bug I wold like to understand if
> this is a problem related to the i7 mobile (my processor is a
> i7 Q720).
> 
> As far as I tested on the same laptop series (dell studio 15),
> with the same kernel this problem does not exists.

So you only see this on the i7.  That's odd.  Can you try 33-rc5?

Posting a reliable reproducer would be nice.  It'd also be nice to see
what all is running when you see this, and where.

	-Mike

--
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/