linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

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: <AANLkTinCPcc8goO_XoJ_DSwbJGOxni_8xOu8Vo+epqCN@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 22:44:29 +0200
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To:	Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>
Cc:	david@...g.hm, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

On Tue, 16.11.10 11:08, david@...g.hm (david@...g.hm) wrote:
>> >If the choice is between telling everybody "you should do this", and
>> >"we should just do this for you", I'll take the second one every time.
>> >We know it should be done. Why should we then tell somebody else to do
>> >it for us?
>>
>> this is good for desktop interactivity because it no longer treats
>> all processes equally, it give more CPU to processes that are
>> running 'stand-alone' then it will to processes that are forked off
>> from one master process.

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Lennart Poettering
<mzxreary@...inter.de> wrote:
> This isn#t good for desktop interatctivey. It is *irrelevant* for
> desktop interactivity -- unless you define running "make -j" a typical
> desktop usecase. Which it isn't.
>
> Just stop bringing about the word "desktop" here. It has no point in
> this discussion.
>
>> In the desktop case where you really want something like 'make -j64'
>
> No you don't. Because that is not a desktop use case.

How about you stop bringing *your* narrow definition of "desktop" to
the discussion? I am a kernel hacker but that doesn't mean I'm not
also a desktop user. I shouldn't need to play with cgroups from
userspace to keep music playing while I compile kernels. Things should
just work.

                        Pekka
--
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/