linux-kernel - [PATCH] sched: correct how RT task is picked

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <BANLkTikkeR_yf1HGhgq7WEO-kEvDGkV_tw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 May 2011 21:04:15 +0800
From:	Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>
To:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] sched: correct how RT task is picked

When picking RT task for given CPU,
[1] if the cpu is invalid for cpumask test, right result could not be
reached even by further checking nr_cpus_allowed,
on the other hand, the input cpu is valid in two cases that
pick_next_highest_task_rt() is called, thus the invalid input cpu
looks over-concern.
[2] if the cpu is valid for cpumask test, further checking
nr_cpus_allowed looks overwork, since it is computed based on
cpus_allowed,
what is more, the combination of cpus_allowed and nr_cpus_allowed
could lead to incorrect result if the input cpu == rq->cpu, as in the
case of next_prio() where no pulling task is concerned.

In this work, invalid cpu is not removed but leads to negative result,
but nr_cpus_allowed is.

Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>
---

--- a/kernel/sched_rt.c	2011-04-27 11:48:50.000000000 +0800
+++ b/kernel/sched_rt.c	2011-05-10 20:30:38.000000000 +0800
@@ -1149,10 +1149,12 @@ static void deactivate_task(struct rq *r

 static int pick_rt_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
 {
-	if (!task_running(rq, p) &&
-	    (cpu < 0 || cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &p->cpus_allowed)) &&
-	    (p->rt.nr_cpus_allowed > 1))
-		return 1;
+	if (!task_running(rq, p)) {
+		if (cpu < 0)
+			return 0;
+		if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &p->cpus_allowed))
+			return 1;
+	}
 	return 0;
 }
--
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/