linux-kernel - Re: [this_cpu_xx V5 19/19] SLUB: Experimental new fastpath w/o interrupt disable

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: <20091007154111.GA12351@Krystal>
Date:	Wed, 7 Oct 2009 11:41:11 -0400
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [this_cpu_xx V5 19/19] SLUB: Experimental new fastpath w/o
	interrupt disable

* Christoph Lameter (cl@...ux-foundation.org) wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> 
> > You are already calling the scheduler when ending the _fast_ path. I
> > don't see the problem with calling it when you end the slow path
> > execution.
> 
> Well yes that gives rise to the thought of using
> 
> 	preempt_enable_no_sched()
> 
> at the end of the fastpath as well. Constant calls into the scheduler
> could be a major performance issue

... but the opposite is a major RT behavior killer.

preempt_check_resched is basically:

a test TIF_NEED_RESCHED
  if true, call to preempt_schedule

So, it's not a call to the scheduler at each and every preempt_enable.
It's _only_ if an interrupt came in during the preempt off section and
the scheduler considered that it should re-schedule soon.

I really don't see what's bothering you here. Testing a thread flag is
incredibly cheap. That's what is typically added to your fast path.

So, correct behavior would be:

preempt disable()
fast path attempt
  if (fast path already taken) {
    local_irq_save();
    slow path.
    local_irq_restore();
  }
preempt_enable()


Mathieu

> . I dont notice it here since I usually
> cannot affort the preempt overhead and build kernels without support for
> it.
> 
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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/