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: <20190723142918.GC8994@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:29:18 +0200
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Fox <afox@...hat.com>,
        Stephen Johnston <sjohnsto@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: make scale_stime() more precise

On 07/23, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > > Yes, statistically the numbers are proportionally divided.
> >
> > This; due to the loss in precision the distribution is like a step
> > function around the actual s:u ratio line, but on average it still is
> > s:u.
>
> You know, I am no longer sure... perhaps it is even worse, I need to recheck.

To clarify, this is probably true even if prev_cputime adds more confusion.
But how many minutes (hours? days?) you need to look at /proc/pid/stat
to get the average which more or less matches the reality?

Oleg.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ