linux-kernel - Re: sched: tweak select_idle_sibling to look for idle threads

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: <1460557378.11954.22.camel@suse.de>
Date:	Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:22:58 +0200
From:	Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>
To:	Chris Mason <clm@...com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sched: tweak select_idle_sibling to look for idle threads

On Wed, 2016-04-13 at 09:44 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:

> So you're interested in numbers where we pass the wake_wide decision
> into select_idle_sibling(), and then use that instead of (or in addition
> to?) my should_scan_idle() function?

Yeah, I was thinking instead of, and hoping that would be enough.

> I agree we may need to tweak wake_wide, since most of our wakeups now
> are failed affine wakeups.

What exactly do you mean by failed affine wakeups?  Failed because
wake_wide() said we don't want one, or because wake_affine() said we
can't have one?  If the later, my thought bubble may have just burst,
but it still "feels" right.

	-Mike