linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] sched/fair: Optimize cgroup pick_next_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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1339768999.2559.69.camel@twins>
Date:	Fri, 15 Jun 2012 16:03:19 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	mingo@...nel.org
Cc:	pjt@...gle.com, venki@...gle.com, efault@....de,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, glommer@...allels.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] sched/fair: Optimize cgroup pick_next_task_fair

On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 23:19 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 15:29 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Since commit 2f36825b1 ("sched: Next buddy hint on sleep and preempt
> > path") it is likely we pick a new task from the same cgroup, doing a put
> > and then set on all intermediate entities is a waste of time, so try to
> > avoid this. 
> 
> I just noticed put_prev_entity() also does the bandwidth enforcement
> stuff, I think I just broke that. Will have a peek at fixing that
> tomorrow or so.

Damn, that's annoying, that wants to be done bottom-up, while we're now
doing a top-down selection. pjt any sane ideas?
--
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/