linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.2.9-rt17

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:44:38 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.2.9-rt17

On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 22:37 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > Now when the original task releases the lock again, the other task can
> > take it just like it does on mainline.
> 
> Now interleave it with a third task of even higher priority that puts
> the spinner to sleep.

So? It will eventually have to allow the task to run. Adding a "third
higher priority" task can cause problems in any other part of the -rt
kernel.

We don't need to worry about priority inversion. If the higher task
blocks on the original task, it will boost its priority (even if it does
the adaptive spin) which will again boost the task that it preempted.

Now we may need to add a sched_yield() in the adaptive spin to let the
other task run.

-- Steve

--
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/