linux-kernel - Re: Considerations on sched APIs under RT patch

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:	Wed, 21 Apr 2010 21:57:13 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Primiano Tucci <p.tucci@...il.com>
Cc:	rostedt@...dmis.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	tglx <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Considerations on sched APIs under RT patch

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 21:24 +0200, Primiano Tucci wrote:
> Is it sure that calling a scheduler api won't induce a re-scheduling
> of the caller process (e.g. as in the case of a lock held by another
> processor)? It would be very unpleasant if the scheduling apis can
> induce re-scheduling, making the realization of a Real Time scheduling
> infrastructure completely un-deterministic. 

No, any syscall can end up blocking/scheduling there are no exceptions.
But blocking doesn't mean its non-deterministic, esp. when coupled with
things like PI.

But you do have to treat system resources as such, that is they can (and
will) create cross-cpu dependencies, if you do not take that into
account you will of course be surprised.



--
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/