On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 09:28:24AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> What about non-x86 architectures, well i guess ia64 and
> powerpc/powerpc64 are the most interesting candidates.
It should be zero cost there too if it has been implemented
correctly. The only feature that initially generated a minimum
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 04:53:16AM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The story about seccomp is that as long as there are users CPUShare
> will support it because it's a more efficient and more secure
> computing model.
>
> About the seccomp overhead, that is zero. It adds zero overhead
Hello,
The story about seccomp is that as long as there are users CPUShare
will support it because it's a more efficient and more secure
computing model.
About the seccomp overhead, that is zero. It adds zero overhead to the
fast path of the scheduler. It never added any overhead on x86-64. For
x
3 matches
Mail list logo
