linux-kernel - Re: [patch] sched: fix/add missing update_rq

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:	Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:27:34 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] sched: fix/add missing update_rq_clock() calls


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 11:07 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > sched: fix/add missing update_rq_clock() calls.
> > 
> > kthread_bind(), migrate_task() and sched_fork were missing updates, and
> > try_to_wake_up() was updating after having already used the stale clock.
> 
> 
> I'm almost at the point where I think we should ditch rq->clock 
> alltogether and simply call cpu_clock() directly when we need it. This 
> trying to optimize and avoid calling it game has brought way too many 
> head-aches.

It's not just about optimization - it's also accounting precision - we 
want to handle the full act of schedule() at a single timestamp - not a 
series of timestamps.

But ... we can get rid of it if it can be done sanely.

	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/