linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] sched/fair: Avoid unnecessary balancing of asymmetric capacity groups

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: <20180223164752.GW25181@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Fri, 23 Feb 2018 17:47:52 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, valentin.schneider@....com,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] sched/fair: Avoid unnecessary balancing of
 asymmetric capacity groups

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 04:38:06PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> > Or am I now terminally confused again?
> 
> No, I think you are right, or I'm equally confused.

:-)

Would it make sense to also track max_capacity, but then based on the
value before RT scaling ?

That should readily be able to distinguish between big and little
clusters, although then DynamiQ would still completely ruin things.