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]
Date:	Wed, 4 Jun 2014 07:46:59 +0800
From:	Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	mingo@...hat.com, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com, len.brown@...el.com,
	alan.cox@...el.com, mark.gross@...el.com, pjt@...gle.com,
	bsegall@...gle.com, morten.rasmussen@....com,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, rajeev.d.muralidhar@...el.com,
	vishwesh.m.rudramuni@...el.com, nicole.chalhoub@...el.com,
	ajaya.durg@...el.com, harinarayanan.seshadri@...el.com,
	jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com, fengguang.wu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 13/16 v3] Intercept wakeup/fork/exec load balancing

On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 02:27:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 02:36:09PM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> > We intercept load balancing to contain the load and load balancing in
> > the consolidated CPUs according to our consolidating mechanism.
> > 
> > In wakeup/fork/exec load balaning, when to find the idlest sched_group,
> > we first try to find the consolidated group
> 
> Anything with intercept in is a complete non-starter. You still fully
> duplicate the logic.
> 
> You really didn't get anything I said, did you?
> 
> Please as to go back to square 1 and read again.
> 
> So take a step back and try and explain what and why you're doing
> things, also try and look at what other people are doing. If I see
> another patch from you within two weeks I'll simply delete it, there's
> no way you can read up and fix everything in such a short time.

Hi Peter,

Thanks for your reply, it hurts though, :(

I was concerned about what you said back, which should be this one:

PeterZ: Fourthly, I'm _never_ going to merge anything that hijacks the load balancer
and does some random other thing. There's going to be a single load-balancer
full stop.

But some explanation to this interception/hijack. It is driven by a sched
policy (SD_WORKLOAD_CONSOLIDATION) and the resulting effect of that policy if
enabled, or still part of the load balancer. Can't do/call it that way?

Thanks,
Yuyang
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ