linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cleanup sched

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: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0911182153010.24119@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:56:52 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <sven@...bigcorporation.com>
cc:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	Leon Woestenberg <leon.woestenberg@...il.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
	rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Ben Dooks (embedded platforms)" <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cleanup sched_yield (sys)call nesting.

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Sven-Thorsten Dietrich wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 17:52 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:28:53 +0100, Leon Woestenberg wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 2:05 AM, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > > > Our timers are very efficient and some day we will need to make jiffies a
> > > > function and stop the timer ticking for best performance. At that point
> > > > timers are probably the most efficient way to do much of this.
> > >
> > > The problem with I2C bitbanged is the stringent timing, we need a way
> > > to have fine-grained sleeping
> > > mixed with real-time tasks in order to make this work.
> > 
> > FWIW, the problem that was initially reported has nothing to do with
> > this. i2c-algo-bit used mdelay() during transactions, not yield().
> > yield() is used only in once place, _between_ transactions attempts.
> > There are no strict timing constraints there.
> > 
> 
> I agree that dropping out sched_yield entirely should maybe start by
> deprecating / flagging as a warning in sched_rt.c.

Errm, that's unrelated to sched_rt.c. 

yield() in the kernel in general is needs to be deprecated.
 
> This is just a minimal cleanup I stumbled across while looking at it -
> to get away from the uglyness of calling into the syscall interface from
> inside the Kernel.

And why exactly is that ugly ?
 
> I'll generate something more substantial for discussion later.
> 
> Subject: clean up chaining in sched_yield()
> From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <sdietrich@...e.de>
> 
> The call to sys_sched_yield for in-Kernel is messy.
> and the return code from sys_sched_yield is ignored when called from
> in-kernel.

Which is completely irrelevant because the return code is always 0.

That patch adds just code bloat for no value.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/