linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] sched: Power scheduler design proposal

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: <51E5655C.7050304@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Jul 2013 08:23:08 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
	"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"vincent.guittot@...aro.org" <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	"preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"alex.shi@...el.com" <alex.shi@...el.com>,
	"efault@....de" <efault@....de>, "pjt@...gle.com" <pjt@...gle.com>,
	"len.brown@...el.com" <len.brown@...el.com>,
	"corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] sched: Power scheduler design proposal

On 7/16/2013 5:42 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Morten's power scheduler tries to address the above and it will grow
> into controlling a new model of power driver (and taking into account
> Arjan's and others' comments regarding the API). At the same time, we
> need some form of task packing. The power scheduler can drive this
> (currently via cpu_power) or can simply turn a knob if there are better
> options that will be accepted in the scheduler.

how much would you be helped if there was a simple switch

sort left   versus    sort right

(assuming the big cores are all either low or high numbers)

the sorting is mostly statistical, but that's good enough in practice..
each time a task wakes up, you get a bias towards either low or high
numbered idle cpus

very quickly all tasks will be on one side, unless your system is so
loaded that all cpus are full.

--
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/