linux-kernel - Re: CPU scheduler weirdness?

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: <1252053631.7564.2.camel@twins>
Date:	Fri, 04 Sep 2009 10:40:31 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Marton Balint <cus@...ekas.hu>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CPU scheduler weirdness?

On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 23:57 +0200, Marton Balint wrote:
> > sched: fine-tune SD_MC_INIT:
> > 14800984706bf6936bbec5187f736e928be5c218
> >
> > If I add again the removed SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE to flags, then everything works 
> > as expected. So what would be the correct fix for this bug? Revert the patch? 
> > Or just add SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE to flags?
> 
> 
> Ingo, Peter, could any of you guys have a look at the commit that caused 
> this bug? Is it OK to revert it? Or a fix somewhere else is necessary? I'm 
> pushing this because I hope that this bug will get fixed in the upcoming 
> stable kernel...

I'm fine with re-adding SD_BALANCE_IDLE and SD_WAKE_IDLE on SMT/MC/CPU
levels.

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/