linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf_events: fix and improve x86 event scheduling

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: <1321309008.1421.50.camel@twins>
Date:	Mon, 14 Nov 2011 23:16:48 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"ming.m.lin@...el.com" <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf_events: fix and improve x86 event scheduling

On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 22:43 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> Also, we don't need an exhaustive max flow solution, any flow that's
> high enough to fit the required capacity will do, this too could
> possibly be used to lower the (average) complexity bound.

I think that for the typically very dense graphs this in particular
could be very helpful in keeping the actual runtime low. For a fully
connected e*c it really doesn't matter how you program things, all flows
will have the same max and iterating them all is just wasting time.

We just need to figure out which of the many different algorithms are
best on average for our particular constraint sets.
--
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/