linux-kernel - Re: group scheduler regression since 4.3 (bisect 9d89c257d sched/fair: Rewrite runnable load and utilization average tracking)

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]

Date:   Mon, 26 Sep 2016 13:53:00 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc:     Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, Morten.Rasmussen@....com,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, pjt@...gle.com, bsegall@...gle.com
Subject: Re: group scheduler regression since 4.3 (bisect 9d89c257d
 sched/fair: Rewrite runnable load and utilization average tracking)

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 01:42:05PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 09/26/2016 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > One of the differences in the old and new thing is being addressed by
> > these patches:
> > 
> >   https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1473666472-13749-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
> > 
> > Could you see if those patches make a difference? If not, we'll have to
> > go poke elsewhere ofcourse ;-)
> 
> Those patches do not apply cleanly on v4.7, linux/master or next/master.
> Is there a good branch to test these patches?

They seemed to apply for me on tip/sched/core, I pushed out a branch for
you that has them on.

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/peterz/queue.git sched/propagate

I didn't boot the result though; but they applied without issue.