linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Introduce fits

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: <20190618031217.63md32da5pzydqia@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:42:17 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, rafael@...nel.org
Cc:     Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Introduce fits_capacity()

+Rafael

On 17-06-19, 17:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 08:22:04AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Hmm, even if the values are same currently I am not sure if we want
> > the same for ever. I will write a patch for it though, if Peter/Rafael
> > feel the same as you.
> 
> Is it really the same variable or just two numbers that happen to be the
> same?

In both cases we are trying to keep the load under 80% of what can be supported.
But I am not sure of the answer to your question.

Maybe Rafael knows :)

-- 
viresh