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  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]
Date:	Mon, 01 Apr 2013 12:36:52 +0530
From:	Preeti U Murthy <>
To:	Joonsoo Kim <>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,, Mike Galbraith <>,
	Paul Turner <>, Alex Shi <>,
	Vincent Guittot <>,
	Morten Rasmussen <>,
	Namhyung Kim <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] sched: don't consider upper se in sched_slice()

Hi Joonsoo,

On 04/01/2013 09:38 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> Hello, Preeti.

>> Ideally the children's cpu share must add upto the parent's share.
> I don't think so.
> We should schedule out the parent tg if 5ms is over. As we do so, we can
> fairly distribute time slice to every tg within short term. If we add
> the children's cpu share upto the parent's, the parent tg may have
> large time slice, so it cannot be preempted easily. There may be a latency
> problem if there are many tgs.

In the case where the #running < sched_nr_latency, the children's
sched_slices add up to the parent's.

A rq with two tgs,each with 3 tasks.

Each of these tasks have a sched slice of
[(sysctl_sched_latency / 3) / 2] as of the present implementation.

The sum of the above sched_slice of all tasks of a tg will lead to the
sched_slice of its parent: sysctl_sched_latency / 2

This breaks when the nr_running on each tg > sched_nr_latency. However I
don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing.

Preeti U Murthy

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists