linux-kernel - Re: [process scheduler] Possible bug in context

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, 9 Sep 2010 13:12:18 +0200
From:	Tim Blechmann <tim@...ngt.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	fabio de francesco <fabio@...anix.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [process scheduler] Possible bug in context_swich()?

On Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:39:06 pm Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 04:32 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 17:54 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 17:28 +0200, fabio de francesco wrote:
> > > > In context_switch() (in linux/kernel/sched.c), starting with release
> > > > 2.6.33, two "unlikely" macro  have been changed to "likely". I think
> > > > the previous logic was right while the latter is wrong.
> > > > 
> > > > In case I am missing something I, please, ask someone to explain the
> > > > above mentioned inversion of logic through releases.
> > > 
> > > It helps if you CC people, LKML alone is a bit of a gamble.
> > > 
> > > git blame kernel/sched.c, will tell you that the change you refer to
> > > comes from:
> > > 
> > > commit 710390d90f143a9ebb87a475215140f426792efd
> > > Author: Tim Blechmann <tim@...ngt.org>
> > > Date:   Tue Nov 24 11:55:27 2009 +0100
> > > 
> > >     sched: Optimize branch hint in context_switch()
> > >     
> > >     Branch hint profiling on my nehalem machine showed over 90%
> > 
> > >     incorrect branch hints:
> > That change never made any sense to me, seems Tim must have been
> > measuring a kthread load.  I benched at the time, and saw absolutely
> > zero difference one way or the other wrt max ctx rate on my Q6600.
> 
> One option is to simply remove the whole branch hint.. But lets ask Tim
> what kind of workload he used..

i was using a standard desktop workload, nothing special ...

-- 
tim@...ngt.org
http://tim.klingt.org

Wherever we are, what we hear is mostly noise. When we ignore it, it
disturbs us. When we listen to it, we find it fascinating.
  John Cage

Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)