[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230906072501.GA38741@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 09:25:01 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>,
Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@...byteword.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: Fair server interface
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 06:17:26PM +0200, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> > Additionally, should not the deadline parameters be vetted by access
> > control before being accepted ?
>
> like security_task_getscheduler(p)? But we have no p...
I was thinking sched_dl_overflow() or thereabout. That still runs on p,
but I'm thikning that should be easily adapted to dl_se or somesuch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists