linux-kernel - Re: [patch 14/26] sched: fix next_interval determination in idle

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, 31 Jul 2007 08:02:34 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
	Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>,
	Chris Wedgwood <reviews@...cw.f00f.org>,
	Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@...il.com>, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, chrisw@...s-sol.org, clameter@....com,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [patch 14/26] sched: fix next_interval determination in idle_balance()

On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 09:32:54PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> -stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

Hello, Greg,

No objections here -- on the contrary, very nice not to have to manually
"taskset" my rcutorture runs.  ;-)

						Thanx, Paul

> ------------------
> 
> From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
> 
> Fix massive SMP imbalance on NUMA nodes observed on 2.6.21.5 with CFS. 
> (and later on reproduced without CFS as well).
> 
> The intervals of domains that do not have SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE must be 
> considered for the calculation of the time of the next balance. 
> Otherwise we may defer rebalancing forever and nodes might stay idle for 
> very long times.
> 
> Siddha also spotted that the conversion of the balance interval to 
> jiffies is missing. Fix that to.
> 
> From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> also continue the loop if !(sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE).
> 
> Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> It did in fact trigger under all three of mainline, CFS, and -rt 
> including CFS -- see below for a couple of emails from last Friday 
> giving results for these three on the AMD box (where it happened) and on 
> a single-quad NUMA-Q system (where it did not, at least not with such 
> severity).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
> ---
>  kernel/sched.c |   22 +++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> --- linux-2.6.21.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6.21.6/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -2831,17 +2831,21 @@ static void idle_balance(int this_cpu, s
>  	unsigned long next_balance = jiffies + 60 *  HZ;
> 
>  	for_each_domain(this_cpu, sd) {
> -		if (sd->flags & SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE) {
> +		unsigned long interval;
> +
> +		if (!(sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE))
> +			continue;
> +
> +		if (sd->flags & SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE)
>  			/* If we've pulled tasks over stop searching: */
>  			pulled_task = load_balance_newidle(this_cpu,
> -							this_rq, sd);
> -			if (time_after(next_balance,
> -				  sd->last_balance + sd->balance_interval))
> -				next_balance = sd->last_balance
> -						+ sd->balance_interval;
> -			if (pulled_task)
> -				break;
> -		}
> +								this_rq, sd);
> +
> +		interval = msecs_to_jiffies(sd->balance_interval);
> +		if (time_after(next_balance, sd->last_balance + interval))
> +			next_balance = sd->last_balance + interval;
> +		if (pulled_task)
> +			break;
>  	}
>  	if (!pulled_task)
>  		/*
> 
> -- 
-
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/