linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Thread Migration Preemption

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1183736619.19602.7.camel@imap.mvista.com>
Date:	Fri, 06 Jul 2007 08:43:39 -0700
From:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Thread Migration Preemption

On Fri, 2007-07-06 at 10:34 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> thing is that in RT an IRQ thread might service a softirq if that
> softirq thread is of the same priority as the IRQ thread. The difference
> between an IRQ thread and a softirq thread is that the IRQ thread may
> migrate but the softirq thread may not. So to do this performance
> enhancement, we need to temporarily pin the IRQ thread to the CPU, which
> is expensive (set_cpus_allowed).  This would make it much simpler and
> light weight to implement.

Are there any other reasons?

Daniel

-
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/