lists.openwall.net   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  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 08 May 2007 16:16:06 +0900
From:	Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com>
To:	vatsa@...ibm.com
Cc:	Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
	Nathan Lynch <nathanl@...tin.ibm.com>,
	Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, paulmck@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [BUG] cpu-hotplug: Can't offline the CPU with naughty	realtime	processes

At Tue, 8 May 2007 09:40:33 +0530,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 12:29:19PM +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
> > > We used to be able to create kernel threads higher than any userspace
> > > priority.  If this is no longer true, I think that's OK: equal priority
> > > still means we'll get scheduled, right?
> > 
> > IF SCHED_RR, yes. However, if SCHED_FIFO, no. Such process doen't have timeslice
> > and only relinquish CPU time voluntarily.
> 
> yeah ..this is truly a problem if SCHED_FIFO user-space cpu hog task is
> running at MAX_USER_RT_PRIO (which happens to be same as max real-time
> priority kernel threads can attain - MAX_RT_PRIO).
> 
> One option is to make MAX_USER_RT_PRIO < MAX_RT_PRIO. I am not sure what
> semantics that will break (perhaps the real-time folks can clarify
> that).

Sometimes I wonder at prio_array. It has 140 entries(from 0 to 139),
and the meaning of each entry is as follows, I think.

+-----------+-----------------------------------------------+
| index     | usage                                         |
+-----------+-----------------------------------------------+
| 0 - 98    | RT processes are here. They are in the entry  |
|           | whose index is 99 - sched_priority.           |
+-----------+-----------------------------------------------+
| 99        | No one use it? CMIIW.                         |
+-----------+-----------------------------------------------+
| 100 - 139 | Ordinally processes are here. They are in the |
|           | entry whose index is (nice+120) +/- 5         |
+-----------+-----------------------------------------------+

What's the purpose of the prio_array[99]? Once I exlore source tree
briefly and can't found any kernel thread which uses this entry.
Does anybody know?

Regards,

Satoru
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ