linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu] Make RCU_FAST_NO

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: <20120706002944.GL2522@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 5 Jul 2012 17:29:44 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
	dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	dhowells@...hat.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com,
	fweisbec@...il.com, sbw@....edu, patches@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu] Make RCU_FAST_NO_HZ respect nohz= boot
 parameter

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 04:02:08PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 03:37:31PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > If the nohz= boot parameter disables nohz, then RCU_FAST_NO_HZ needs to
> > also disable itself.  This commit therefore checks for tick_nohz_enabled
> > being zero, disabling rcu_prepare_for_idle() if so.  This patch assumes
> > that tick_nohz_enabled can change at runtime: If this is not the case,
> > then a simpler approach suffices.
> 
> Allowing nohz to change at runtime seems like an entirely unnecessary
> bit of added complexity.  (So does having a boot parameter for it, but
> that one at least seems easier to handle.)

I will let representatives from the various distros expound to you on
their one-binary-only strategy for kernel builds.  ;-)

> What would the patch look like if you can assume nohz will never change
> at runtime?  And does anyone have a use case for changing nohz at
> runtime, rather than at boot time?

It would be a little bit simpler, but would break in very odd and
difficult-to-debug ways if anyone ever did allow it to change at runtime,
for example, to accommodate systems subject to varying workloads.

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/