linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] sched: remove SMP cover for runnable variables in cfs

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: <CAPM31R+-zeuquH7ozjjZEGX03aWoek1xJ5LgsaVP5j1WnxzzRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 6 May 2013 02:08:02 -0700
From:	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
To:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] sched: remove SMP cover for runnable variables in cfs_rq

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com> wrote:
> On 05/06/2013 04:01 PM, Paul Turner wrote:
>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com> wrote:
>>> The following variables were covered under CONFIG_SMP in struct cfs_rq.
>>> but similar runnable variables work for UP in struct rq and task_group.
>>> like rq->avg, task_group->load_avg.
>>> So move them out, they also can work with UP.
>>
>> Is there a proposed use-case for UP?  My apologies if I missed it in
>> an alternate patch.
>
>> It would seem the only possibly useful thing there would the the
>> per-rq average for p-state selection; but we can get that without the
>> per-entity values already.
>
>
> Do you mean to move the rq->avg and task_group->load_avg into CONFIG_SMP?

More generally:  Why do we need them in !CONFIG_SMP?

[ I was suggesting (potentially) using only rq->avg in the !CONFIG_SMP case. ]


>
> --
> 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/