linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Patch: dynticks: idle load balancing

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]

Message-ID: <20061214003456.GA2064@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 14 Dec 2006 01:34:56 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Cc:	nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, vatsa@...ibm.com, clameter@....com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Patch: dynticks: idle load balancing


* Siddha, Suresh B <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> wrote:

> > the other problem is load_balance(): there this_rq is locked and you 
> > call resched_cpu() unconditionally.
> 
> But here resched_cpu() was called after double_rq_unlock().

yeah, you are right - the schedule() one is/was the only problem.

	Ingo
-
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/