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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 5 Oct 2021 11:41:02 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
        Barry Song <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>,
        Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Scale wakeup granularity relative to
 nr_running

On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 04:04:57PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 04:15:27PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:

> The reason I used SCHED_TUNABLESCALING_NONE for the changelog is that
> the exact values depend on the number of CPUs so values are not even
> the same across the range of machines I'm using. sysctl_sched_latency,
> sysctl_sched_min_granularity sysctl_sched_wakeup_granularity are all
> scaled but the ratios remain constant.

It might make sense to reconsider the whole scaling thing FWIW. It used
to be that desktop systems had 'small' number of CPUs (<=8) and servers
had more.

But today it's not uncommon to have 32-64 CPUs in a desktop system. And
even LOG scaling gets us into stupid numbers for the latencies.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists