linux-kernel - Re: x86, mce, Use user return notifier in mce

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: <CAOS58YP-4=Tf61mDNBTgvnhpYbisTjDVjAVmDdxyrFDXwVN1cg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:56:08 -0800
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc:	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
	Chen Gong <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: x86, mce, Use user return notifier in mce

Hello,

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
> It appears that WQ_HIGHPRI only provides priority between work queue,
> not between the work queue backing kthread and other tasks.  Is there
> any mechanism for that?

No, it doesn't.

> If my understanding was correct, WQ_MEM_RECLAIM has some side-effect for
> that.  Because hardware errors occurs seldom, the reserved kthread for
> WQ_MEME_RECLAIM just sleeps most of the time.  When first hardware error
> occurs and the work item is queued, the reserved kthread is waked up.
> Because the reserved kthread sleeps for long time, it is highly possible
> for it to be scheduled at the next schedule point.

But rescuer is used only under memory pressure. It doesn't help latency at all.

> Because hardware error usually has no locality, WQ_UNBOUND can be used
> for it so that the work item can be put on relative low-load CPU.  From
> the document, it is said WQ_UNBOUND work items will be executed ASAP
> too.  Compared with WQ_HIGHPRI, how about the priority of WQ_UNBOUND?

Maybe, maybe not. I suggest just using WQ_HIGHPRI for now and worrying
about it later if the scheduling latency actually turns out to matter.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/