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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 14:17:18 +0200 From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com> To: paul.szabo@...ney.edu.au Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: CFS scheduler unfairly prefers pinned tasks On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 21:06 +1100, paul.szabo@...ney.edu.au wrote: > And further... the CFS is meant to be fair, using things like vruntime > to preempt, and throttling. Why are those pinned tasks not preempted or > throttled? Imagine you own a 8192 CPU box for a moment, all CPUs having one pinned task, plus one extra unpinned task, and ponder what would have to happen in order to meet your utilization expectation. <time passes> Right. What you're seeing is not a bug. No task can occupy more than one CPU at a time, making space reservation on multiple CPUs a very bad idea. -Mike -- 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