From: Raistlin <raistlin@linux.it>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Douglas Niehaus <niehaus@ittc.ku.edu>,
Henrik Austad <henrik@austad.us>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org>,
Linux RT <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
Fabio Checconi <fabio@gandalf.sssup.it>,
"James H. Anderson" <anderson@cs.unc.edu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ted Baker <baker@cs.fsu.edu>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@gmail.com>,
Noah Watkins <jayhawk@soe.ucsc.edu>,
KUSP Google Group <kusp@googlegroups.com>,
Tommaso Cucinotta <cucinotta@sssup.it>,
Giuseppe Lipari <lipari@retis.sssup.it>
Subject: Re: RFC for a new Scheduling policy/class in the Linux-kernel
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:47:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1247600837.4839.128.camel@Palantir> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1247506102.7500.41.camel@twins>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2000 bytes --]
On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 19:28 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > - analyzable from the real-time theorist's point of view... Which is
> > (un?)fortunately what we are :-)
> > - possible to implement... Which is not always (un!)fortunately obvious
> > here :-)
>
> I would very much like a proper theoretical foundation for whatever we
> end up with ;-)
>
Well, thus let's hope to manage in it! :-D
> > Very basically: from the analysis point of view one easy and effective
> > solution would be to have the blocked-running tasks --i.e., the tasks
> > blocked on some lock that have been left on the rq to proxy-execute the
> > lock owner-- busy waiting while the lock owner is running. This allows
> > for retaining a lot of nice properties BWI already has, as far as
> > analyzability is concerned.
>
> Right, practically we cannot do this, since we expose the block graph to
> userspace and you could in userspace construct a program that would
> exploit this spinning to DoS the system.
>
I know and I share this belief with you, as I wrote in my original
mail... Even if I must say that it would not be a _real_ spinning, such
as raw_spinlock_t, with irq and preemption disabled (like in FMLP), but
only a mean to --preemptively-- consume some budget to avoid
schedulability to be lost!
Thus, I'm not sure it could be the basis for a DoS, especially if tasks
are, individually, as a group or as a whole class, enclosed within
groups (we used to call them reservations as well).
Anyway I'm aware that CPU bandwidth would be wasted, and that this is an
issue in systems like Linux... That's why we are striving for something
better... :-P
Regards,
Dario
--
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, ReTiS Lab, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa (Italy)
http://blog.linux.it/raistlin / raistlin@ekiga.net /
dario.faggioli@jabber.org
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-14 19:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-10 21:50 RFC for a new Scheduling policy/class in the Linux-kernel Henrik Austad
2009-07-11 18:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-12 2:40 ` Douglas Niehaus
2009-07-12 15:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-13 15:44 ` Raistlin
2009-07-13 16:33 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-14 10:47 ` Raistlin
2009-07-14 11:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-14 11:56 ` Luca Abeni
2009-07-14 18:19 ` Raistlin
2009-07-14 14:48 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-14 15:19 ` James H. Anderson
2009-07-14 16:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-14 16:54 ` James H. Anderson
2009-07-14 19:28 ` Henrik Austad
2009-07-14 19:33 ` James H. Anderson
2009-07-15 21:53 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-17 7:40 ` Henrik Austad
2009-07-17 13:37 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-15 4:25 ` Bjoern B. Brandenburg
2009-07-15 20:55 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-15 21:53 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-15 22:34 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-15 22:39 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-07-15 23:16 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-16 8:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-16 9:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-17 0:32 ` Raistlin
2009-07-17 0:43 ` Raistlin
2009-07-16 12:17 ` Raistlin
2009-07-16 23:29 ` Raistlin
2009-07-18 20:12 ` Michal Sojka
2009-07-14 17:16 ` James H. Anderson
2009-07-15 21:19 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-14 19:54 ` Raistlin
2009-07-14 16:48 ` Raistlin
2009-07-14 18:24 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-14 19:14 ` Raistlin
2009-07-15 22:14 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-16 7:17 ` Henrik Austad
2009-07-16 23:13 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-17 0:19 ` Raistlin
2009-07-17 7:31 ` Henrik Austad
2009-07-16 14:46 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-16 22:34 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-16 23:07 ` Raistlin
2009-07-15 21:45 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-15 22:12 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-15 22:52 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-17 13:35 ` Giuseppe Lipari
2009-07-13 17:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-13 18:14 ` Noah Watkins
2009-07-13 20:13 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-13 21:45 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-14 11:16 ` Raistlin
2009-07-15 23:11 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-16 7:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-16 8:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-07-16 12:17 ` Raistlin
2009-07-16 12:59 ` James H. Anderson
2009-07-16 13:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-16 22:15 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-16 22:34 ` Karthik Singaram Lakshmanan
2009-07-16 23:38 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-17 1:44 ` Karthik Singaram Lakshmanan
2009-07-16 15:17 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-16 21:26 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-16 22:08 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-16 23:54 ` Ted Baker
2009-07-14 9:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-14 19:07 ` Raistlin
2009-07-13 17:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-14 19:47 ` Raistlin [this message]
[not found] ` <002301ca0403$47f9d9d0$d7ed8d70$@tlh@comcast.net>
2009-07-13 23:47 ` Douglas Niehaus
2009-07-14 7:27 ` Chris Friesen
2009-07-14 7:44 ` Douglas Niehaus
2009-07-12 6:17 ` Henrik Austad
2009-07-13 9:55 ` Raistlin
2009-07-13 10:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-13 16:06 ` Raistlin
2009-07-14 8:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-14 9:36 ` Raistlin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1247600837.4839.128.camel@Palantir \
--to=raistlin@linux.it \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=anderson@cs.unc.edu \
--cc=baker@cs.fsu.edu \
--cc=billh@gnuppy.monkey.org \
--cc=cucinotta@sssup.it \
--cc=dhaval.giani@gmail.com \
--cc=fabio@gandalf.sssup.it \
--cc=henrik@austad.us \
--cc=jayhawk@soe.ucsc.edu \
--cc=kusp@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lipari@retis.sssup.it \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niehaus@ittc.ku.edu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox