linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/6] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit integer

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160428183347.GB16093@intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 02:33:47 +0800
From:	Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To:	bsegall@...gle.com
Cc:	peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pjt@...gle.com,
	morten.rasmussen@....com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	dietmar.eggemann@....com, juri.lelli@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number
 of periods to 32bit integer

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:29:55AM -0700, bsegall@...gle.com wrote:
> Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com> writes:
> 
> > Now a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned integer can approximately
> > hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) days, which means it is big enough
> > and 64-bit is needless.
> >
> If a thread sleeps for 49 days and then wakes up this would be wrong...
> but it also would just result in it not being decayed to zero, and even
> then only if it was in a very small window, so it doesn't seem like a
> huge deal if it happens.
 
Oh, yeah, and we wouldn't know that task is as sleepy as it realy is. :)