| 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: <20100218160329.GG5964@basil.fritz.box> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:03:30 +0100 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Arun R Bharadwaj <arun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>, tglx@...utronix.de, davem@...emloft.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...radead.org, venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com Subject: Re: NO_HZ migration of TCP ack timers > > > What should we do? Should we use mod_timer_pinned here? Or is this an issue > > > > Sounds like something that should be controlled by the cpufreq governour's > > idle predictor? Only migrate if predicted idle time is long enough. > > It's essentially the same problem as deciding how deeply idle to put > > a CPU. Heavy measures only pay off if the expected time is long enough. > > > > cpuidle infrastructure hs statistics about the idle times for > all the cpus. Maybe we can look to use this infrastructure to decide > whether to migrate timers or not? Yes sorry I reallhy meant cpuidle when I wrote cpufreq. That's what I suggested too. But if the problem is lock contention on the target CPU that would still not completely solve it, just make it less frequent depending on the idle pattern. -Andi -- ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. -- 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