From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161035AbXCMRVx (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:21:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161038AbXCMRVx (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:21:53 -0400 Received: from turing-police.cc.vt.edu ([128.173.14.107]:55459 "EHLO turing-police.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161044AbXCMRVw (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:21:52 -0400 Message-Id: <200703131721.l2DHLDjV009580@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.2 To: Xavier Bestel Cc: Con Kolivas , Mike Galbraith , Ingo Molnar , linux kernel mailing list , ck list , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH][RSDL-mm 0/7] RSDL cpu scheduler for 2.6.21-rc3-mm2 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:06:43 BST." <1173726403.9153.5.camel@bip.parateam.prv> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <200703111457.17624.kernel@kolivas.org> <200703122223.07048.kernel@kolivas.org> <1173710082.6326.49.camel@Homer.simpson.net> <200703130549.47058.kernel@kolivas.org> <1173726403.9153.5.camel@bip.parateam.prv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1173806473_3149P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:21:13 -0400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_1173806473_3149P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:06:43 BST, Xavier Bestel said: > Le mardi 13 mars 2007 =E0 05:49 +1100, Con Kolivas a =E9crit : > > Again I think your test is not a valid testcase. Why use two threads = for your=20 > > encoding with one cpu? Is that what other dedicated desktop OSs would= do? >=20 > One thought occured to me (shit happens, sometimes): as your scheduler > is =22strictly fair=22, won't that enable trivial DoS by just letting a= n > user fork a multitude of CPU-intensive processes ? Fork bombs are the reason that 'ulimit -u' exists. I don't see this sched= uler as being significantly more DoS'able via that route than previous schedul= ers. --==_Exmh_1173806473_3149P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFF9t2JcC3lWbTT17ARArqBAKCLGF5KbFKNHUfLDMYV7mEWqAYmNACgp4GJ vVZJgQepswpfw5OKuRf8KFU= =7pVN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1173806473_3149P--