linux-kernel - Re: BFS cpu scheduler and skip list implementation

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: <20110924073522.GV7761@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:35:22 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BFS cpu scheduler and skip list implementation

On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 12:14:21PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 11:21:06 Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org> writes:
> > > +struct nodeStructure {
> > > +	int level;	/* Levels in this structure */
> > > +	keyType key;
> > > +	valueType value;
> > > +	skiplist_node *next[16];
> > > +	skiplist_node *prev[16];
> > > +};
> > 
> > That's 128 byte / 2 cache lines, not too bad, but it limits
> > the maximum number of tasks that can be efficiently handled
> > (my guess to around 64k with maxlevel == 16, but someone may
> > correct me on that)
> 
> Thanks very much for your informed comments. Do you mean once 64k of tasks are 
> queued concurrently, or after 64k of entries have gone in +/- been removed?

queued concurrently I believe.

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/