linux-kernel - Re: The 10ms averager in fair.c

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

Message-id: <op.wljhw7yc6426ze@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 02 Oct 2012 09:04:09 +0200
From:	Uwaysi Bin Kareem <uwaysi.bin.kareem@...adoxuncreated.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Subject: Re: The 10ms averager in fair.c

Ok, so you don`t know. Well, then it looks like what I said, to me. What  
is a 100us load, that gets filtered by a 10ms filter? Nothing.
Or a very very small value that rises and falls over 10ms.  
Load-distribution based on a spike that happened a long time ago (in  
computing terms) seems very odd. You don`t even know the average before  
5ms.

I am going to look at the code, and see if I can make a patch.

Peace Be With You.

On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 04:50:02 +0200, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:

> On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 15:24 +0200, Uwaysi Bin Kareem wrote:
>
>> Are you sure this isn`t just a design-philosophy that was done, without
>> much knowledge of filters?
>
> Are you?  I see "I don't see the point", along with "I haven't looked
> closely".  If you look, perhaps you'll see a better way, and can post
> patches.  That's the strength of opensource.
>
> -Mike
--
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/