linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/10] sched/deadline: track the active utilization

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: <20170608104322.060b9139@luca>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:43:22 +0200
From:   Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
        Claudio Scordino <claudio@...dence.eu.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...up.it>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] sched/deadline: track the active utilization

On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:31:25 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:

> * luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it> wrote:
> 
> > From: Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
> > 
> > Active utilization is defined as the total utilization of active
> > (TASK_RUNNING) tasks queued on a runqueue. Hence, it is increased
> > when a task wakes up and is decreased when a task blocks.
> > 
> > When a task is migrated from CPUi to CPUj, immediately subtract the
> > task's utilization from CPUi and add it to CPUj. This mechanism is
> > implemented by modifying the pull and push functions.
> > Note: this is not fully correct from the theoretical point of view
> > (the utilization should be removed from CPUi only at the 0 lag
> > time), a more theoretically sound solution is presented in the
> > next patches.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
> > Tested-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>  
> 
> So that SOB chain is not valid - either Juri needs to be the From:
> author, or it should be an Acked-by (or Reviewed-by).
> 
> For now I've converted this to:
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
> > Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>  

Sorry, my fault: I must have misunderstood how to use the Signed-off-by
stuff.

The story here is that I took a patch originally developed by Juri and
fixed and I heavily modified it. Since the current patch is very
different from the original one, Juri suggested I should by the "From:"
author, and I simply added his Signed-off-by to acknowledge that he was
the author of the original patch.

If Juri is ok with your change, I agree with it.


			Thanks,
				Luca