linux-kernel - Re: [tip:sched/core] sched: don't rebalance if attached on NULL domain

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, 5 Mar 2009 09:40:07 -0500 (EST)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	fweisbec@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...e.hu
cc:	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/core] sched: don't rebalance if attached on NULL
 domain


On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> 
> sched: don't rebalance if attached on NULL domain
> 
> Impact: fix function graph trace hang / drop pointless softirq on UP
> 
> While debugging a function graph trace hang on an old PII, I saw
> that it consumed most of its time on the timer interrupt. And
> the domain rebalancing softirq was the most concerned.
> 
> The timer interrupt calls trigger_load_balance() which will
> decide if it is worth to schedule a rebalancing softirq.
> 
> In case of builtin UP kernel, no problem arises because there is
> no domain question.
> 
> In case of builtin SMP kernel running on an SMP box, still no
> problem, the softirq will be raised each time we reach the
> next_balance time.
> 
> In case of builtin SMP kernel running on a UP box (most distros
> provide default SMP kernels, whatever the box you have), then
> the CPU is attached to the NULL sched domain. So a kind of
> unexpected behaviour happen:
> 
> trigger_load_balance() -> raises the rebalancing softirq later
> on softirq: run_rebalance_domains() -> rebalance_domains() where
> the for_each_domain(cpu, sd) is not taken because of the NULL
> domain we are attached at. Which means rq->next_balance is never
> updated. So on the next timer tick, we will enter
> trigger_load_balance() which will always reschedule() the
> rebalacing softirq:
> 
> if (time_after_eq(jiffies, rq->next_balance))
> 	raise_softirq(SCHED_SOFTIRQ);
> 
> So for each tick, we process this pointless softirq.

Nice catch!

-- Steve
--
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/