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: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 15:27:40 -0200 From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Yu Fenghua <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] ioctl based CAT interface On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 05:51:00PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 02:39:33PM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > + * * one tcrid entry can be in different locations > > + * in different sockets. > > NAK on that without cpuset integration. > > I do not want freely migratable tasks having radically different > performance profiles depending on which CPU they land. Please expand on what "cpuset integration" means, operationally. I hope it does not mean "i prefer cgroups as an interface", because that does not mean much to me. So you are saying this should be based on cgroups? Have you seen the cgroups proposal and the issues with it, that have been posted? -- 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