linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 02/22] sched: add extended scheduling interface

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:	Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:08:51 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Raistlin <raistlin@...ux.it>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>, oleg@...hat.com,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Darren Hart <darren@...art.com>,
	Johan Eker <johan.eker@...csson.com>,
	"p.faure" <p.faure@...tech.ch>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Claudio Scordino <claudio@...dence.eu.com>,
	michael trimarchi <trimarchi@...is.sssup.it>,
	Fabio Checconi <fabio@...dalf.sssup.it>,
	Tommaso Cucinotta <cucinotta@...up.it>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>,
	Nicola Manica <nicola.manica@...i.unitn.it>,
	Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...is.sssup.it>,
	Harald Gustafsson <hgu1972@...il.com>,
	paulmck <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 02/22] sched: add extended scheduling interface

On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 14:54 +0100, Raistlin wrote:
> > The last three parameters look to be output only as I've not yet found
> > code that reads it, and __getparam_dl() doesn't even appear to set
> > used_runtime.
> > 
> Yeah, just kind of statistical reporting of the task's behaviour. That's
> why I was in agreement with Dhaval about using schedstats for those
> (bumping the version, obviously). What do you think?

So its pure output?  In that case its not really a nice fit for
sched_param, however..

I'm not really a fan of schedstat, esp if you have to use it very
frequently, the overhead of open()+read()+close() + parsing text is
quite high.

Then again, if people are really going to use this (big if I guess) we
could add yet another syscall for this or whatever.

> > One thing you can do is add some padding, versioning and void*
> > extentions are doable for the setparam() path, but getparam() is going
> > to be mighty interesting.
> > 
> Mmm... So, tell me if I got it well: I remove the last three parameters
> (e.g., moving them toward schedstats) and add (besides _var and _max)
> some padding? It that correct?

grmbl, so I was going to say, just pad it to a nice 2^n size, but then I
saw that struct timespec is defined as two long's, which means we're
going to have to do compat crap.

Thomas is there a sane time format in existence? I thought the whole
purpose of timeval/timespec was to avoid having to use a u64, but then
using longs as opposed to int totally defeats the purpose. 

> what about the len <== sizeof(struct sched_param2) in
> sched_{set,get}{param,scheduler}2()... Does this still make sense, or
> are we removing it? 

Since we're going for a constant sized structure we might as well take
it out.
--
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/