linux-kernel - Re: [REGRESSION 2.6.30][PATCH 1/1] sched: defer idle accounting till after load update period

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: <1270195184.5109.523.camel@twins>
Date:	Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:59:44 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	kernel-team <kernel-team@...ts.ubuntu.com>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION 2.6.30][PATCH 1/1] sched: defer idle accounting
 till after load update period

On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 22:18 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Well, the uninterruptible count imbalance is preventing us to calc the
> load avg per cpu, which is something the power saving folks are
> interested in.
> 
> If that is fixed we probably have a good chance to collect the per cpu
> stuff and build a combined one - have not looked into the gory details
> of the math yet.

The problem with all this per-cpu loadavg is that it would require a
steady tick on each cpu to age this loadavg, which is quite in
contradiction with power savings as they rather like the nohz feature.

No idea yet on what to do about that.
--
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/