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  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:	Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:22:06 +0300
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <>
To:	Nick Piggin <>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <>, David Miller <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP

On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 09:07:42PM +1100, Nick Piggin ( wrote:
> >Doesn't the provided solution is just a in-kernel variant of the
> >SCHED_FIFO set from userspace? Why kernel should be able to mark some
> >users as having higher priority?
> >What if workload of the system is targeted to not the maximum TCP
> >performance, but maximum other-task performance, which will be broken
> >with provided patch.
> David's line of thinking for a solution sounds better to me. This patch
> does not prevent the process from being preempted (for potentially a long
> time), by any means.

It steals timeslices from other processes to complete tcp_recvmsg()
task, and only when it does it for too long, it will be preempted.
Processing backlog queue on behalf of need_resched() will break fairness
too - processing itself can take a lot of time, so process can be
scheduled away in that part too.

> -- 
> SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
> Send instant messages to your online friends 

	Evgeniy Polyakov
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists