| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 23:02:42 +0000 From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, gleb@...hat.com, asharma@...com, vince@...ter.net, wcohen@...hat.com Subject: Re: perf_events: proposed fix for broken intr throttling (repost) On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 21:33 +0000, Stephane Eranian wrote: >> > I don't think it needs that, I do dislike the unconditional iterate all >> > events thing though. Maybe we can set some per-cpu state indicating >> > someone got throttled (rare under normal operation -- you'd hope) and >> > only iterate to unthrottle when we find this set. >> > >> Could try that too. >> >> > I think the event scheduling resulting from migration will already >> > re-enable the event, avoiding the loss of unthrottle due to that.. >> > although it would be good to verify that. >> > >> Yes, you're not dead forever, but still it is not acceptable as is. > > Oh for sure, I didn't mean it like that. What I was getting at is a > counter getting throttled on one cpu, setting the per-cpu variable, > getting migrated and not getting unthrottled due to now living on > another cpu which doesn't have the per-cpu thing set. > Yes, that is true. I think that throttled counter needs to live in ctx and not per-cpu. -- 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