linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] sched/fair: Burstable CFS bandwidth controller

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:   Thu, 17 Dec 2020 13:25:31 -0800
From:   Benjamin Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>
To:     Huaixin Chang <changhuaixin@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        juri.lelli@...hat.com, mgorman@...e.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        pauld@...head.com, peterz@...radead.org, pjt@...gle.com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
        shanpeic@...ux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] sched/fair: Burstable CFS bandwidth controller

The code for this looks fine, and the feature is something people do
seem to ask for occasionally. I agree with peterz that using this
generally means you lose any guarantees (which are already imperfect
given CFS), but I suspect that cfsb is being used in overload anyways.

The docs could use a grammar/wording pass maybe, but that's easy enough.