linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 09/22] sched: compute runnable load avg in cpu_load and cpu_avg_load_per

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

Message-ID: <50FF445C.5070909@intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:01:00 +0800
From:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
CC:	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, namhyung@...nel.org,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/22] sched: compute runnable load avg in cpu_load
 and cpu_avg_load_per_task

On 01/23/2013 09:47 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 08:36 +0800, Alex Shi wrote: 
>> On 01/22/2013 05:52 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 15:50 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for your suggestions and example, Mike!
>>>> I just can't understand the your last words here, Sorry. what the
>>>> detailed concern of you on 'both performance profiles with either
>>>> metric'? Could you like to give your preferred solutions?
>>>
>>> Hm.. I'll try rephrasing.  Any power saving gain will of necessity be
>>> paid for in latency currency.  I don't have a solution other than make a
>>> button, let the user decide whether history influences fast path task
>>> placement or not.  Any other decision maker will get it wrong.
>>
>> Um, if no other objection, I'd like to move the runnable load only used
>> for power friendly policy -- for this patchset, they are 'powersaving'
>> and 'balance', Can I?
> 
> Yeah, that should work be fine.

Thanks for comments! :)
> 
> -Mike
> 


-- 
Thanks Alex
--
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/