linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] sched/fair: Add sched group latency support

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: <CAKfTPtD1P0oTf6drOW9XwVnQ8MsCihs0rV6j+L2HV93JP-U9Lg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Sep 2022 08:40:36 +0200
From:   Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, mingo@...hat.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com,
        vschneid@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        parth@...ux.ibm.com, chris.hyser@...cle.com,
        valentin.schneider@....com, patrick.bellasi@...bug.net,
        David.Laight@...lab.com, pjt@...gle.com, pavel@....cz,
        qperret@...gle.com, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, joshdon@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] sched/fair: Add sched group latency support

On Wed, 21 Sept 2022 at 19:12, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 07:02:57PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > One option could be just using the same mapping as cpu.weight so that 100
> > > maps to neutral, 10000 maps close to -20, 1 maps close to 19. It isn't great
> > > that the value can't be interpreted in any intuitive way (e.g. a time
> > > duration based interface would be a lot easier to grok even if it still is
> > > best effort) but if that's what the per-task interface is gonna be, it'd be
> > > best to keep cgroup interface in line.
> >
> > I would prefer a signed range like the [-1000:1000] as the behavior is
> > different for sensitive and non sensitive task unlike the cpu.weight
> > which is reflect that a bigger value get more
>
> How about just sticking with .nice?

Looks good to me. I will just implement the cpu.latency.nice

>
> --
> tejun