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:   Tue, 7 Mar 2017 20:04:38 +0000
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>
CC:     "Shivappa, Vikas" <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        "Kleen, Andi" <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
        "davidcc@...gle.com" <davidcc@...gle.com>,
        "eranian@...gle.com" <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements

> That's all nice and good, but I still have no coherent explanation why
> measuring across allocation domains makes sense.

Is this in reaction to this one?

>> 5)      Put multiple threads into a single measurement group

If we fix it to say "threads from the same CAT group" does it fix things?

We'd like to have measurement groups use a single RMID ... if we
allowed tasks from different CAT groups in the same measurement
group we wouldn't be able to split the numbers back to report the
right overall total for each of the CAT groups.

-Tony

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ