linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] mm: make vmstat

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 9 May 2012 17:26:08 +0300
From:	Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...era.com>,
	Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@...il.com>,
	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] mm: make vmstat_update periodic run conditional

On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 May 2012, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
>
>> > But this would still mean that the vmstat update thread would run on an
>> > arbitrary cpu. If I have a sacrificial lamb processor for OS processing
>> > then I would expect the vmstat update thread to stick to that processor
>> > and avoid to run on the other processor that I would like to be as free
>> > from OS noise as possible.
>> >
>>
>> OK, what about -
>>
>> - We pick a scapegoat cpu (the first to come up gets the job).
>> - We add a knob to let user designate another cpu for the job.
>> - If scapegoat cpus goes offline, the cpu processing the off lining is
>> the new scapegoat.
>>
>> Does this makes better sense?
>
> Sounds good. The first that comes up. If the cpu is isolated then the
> first non isolated cpu is picked.
>

OK, will do.

Thanks,
Gilad


-- 
Gilad Ben-Yossef
Chief Coffee Drinker
gilad@...yossef.com
Israel Cell: +972-52-8260388
US Cell: +1-973-8260388
http://benyossef.com

"If you take a class in large-scale robotics, can you end up in a
situation where the homework eats your dog?"
 -- Jean-Baptiste Queru
--
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/