| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20140610180954.GB5487@intel.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 02:09:54 +0800 From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com> To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/16 v3] Init Workload Consolidation flags in sched_domain On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:52:06PM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: Hi Dietmar, > Not in this sense but there is no functionality in the scheduler right > now to check constantly if an sd flag has been set/unset via sysctl. Sorry, I still don't understand. There are many "if (sd->flags & SD_XXX)" in fair.c. What does it mean to you? Probably you mean the SD_XX should be fixed in init and never changed via sysctl thereafter. Ah... I don't know about this... Overall, I think I should come up with a better way to implement the SD_WORKLOAD_CONSOLIDATION policy (enabled or disabled) in load balancing (as is also pointed out by PeterZ). But I just don't see the current implementation is any particular different than any other SD_XX's. Have you tried it on your platform? Thanks a lot, 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