linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] sparc64: Use low latency path to resume idle cpu

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:11:45 -0500
From:   Vijay Kumar <vijay.ac.kumar@...cle.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, rob.gardner@...cle.com,
        anthony.yznaga@...cle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] sparc64: Use low latency path to resume idle cpu


On 7/20/2017 10:45 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Vijay Kumar <vijay.ac.kumar@...cle.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 22:36:42 -0500
>
>> I can give a try :). But looks to me one thing that will go wrong is
>> irq accounting done in __irq_enter() and rcu_irq_enter().
> Actually, the bigger problem is that scheduler_ipi() can raise a
> software interrupt, and nothing will invoke it.
Yes, I see your point.

> It's turning quite ugly to avoid the IRQ overhead, I must admit.
> So ignore this for now.
>
> In the longer term a probably cleaner way to do this is to have
> a special direct version of scheduler_ipi() that invokes all the
> necessary work, even the rebalance softirq, directly rather than
> indirectly.

Sure. Thanks.