linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched: avoid overpull when pulling RT task

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110518012114.GB23940@home.goodmis.org>
Date:	Tue, 17 May 2011 21:21:14 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: avoid overpull when pulling RT task

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 10:25:54PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> 
> Efforts are put on the puller's side, but bad result is reached:(
> 
> Another patch is prepared, in which pusher is asked to do the hard works,
> say pushees and tasks are selected.
> 
> Unlike puller who only concerns one runqueue that accepts the pulled tasks,
> pusher delivers tasks to more runqueues, so the overpull could get bigger.
> 
> Please review again, thanks.
> 

Have you actually observed an overpull? And if so, how bad was it?

I hate to be fixing bugs that don't really exist.

-- Steve

--
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/