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: <20110504111355.GC5914@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 4 May 2011 13:13:55 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Nikhil Rao <ncrao@...gle.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Stephan Barwolf <stephan.baerwolf@...ilmenau.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/19] Increase resolution of load weights


* Nikhil Rao <ncrao@...gle.com> wrote:

> Also, out of curiosity, what's an acceptable tolerance level for a 
> performance hit on 32-bit?

It's a cost/benefit analysis and for 32-bit systems the benefits seem to be 
rather small, right?

Can we make the increase in resolution dependent on max CPU count or such and 
use cheaper divides on 32-bit in that case, while still keeping the code clean? 

We'd expect only relatively large and new (and 64-bit) systems to run into 
resolution problems, right?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ