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: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 17:01:24 +0000 From: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk> To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Morten.Rasmussen@....com, dietmar.eggemann@....com, kernellwp@...il.com, yuyang.du@...el.com, umgwanakikbuti@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] sched: fix find_idlest_group for fork On Fri, 25 Nov, at 04:34:32PM, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > index aa47589..820a787 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > @@ -5463,13 +5463,19 @@ find_idlest_group(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p, > * utilized systems if we require spare_capacity > task_util(p), > * so we allow for some task stuffing by using > * spare_capacity > task_util(p)/2. > + * spare capacity can't be used for fork because the utilization has > + * not been set yet as it need to get a rq to init the utilization > */ > + if (sd_flag & SD_BALANCE_FORK) > + goto no_spare; > + > if (this_spare > task_util(p) / 2 && > imbalance*this_spare > 100*most_spare) > return NULL; > else if (most_spare > task_util(p) / 2) > return most_spare_sg; > > +no_spare: > if (!idlest || 100*this_load < imbalance*min_load) > return NULL; > return idlest; It's only a minor comment, but would you be opposed to calling this label 'skip_spare' to indicate that spare capacity may exist, but we're not going to make use of it?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists