linux-kernel - Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5072BA10.8080100@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 08 Oct 2012 19:33:36 +0800
From:	Charles Wang <muming.wq@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
CC:	Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@...il.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhc@...ote.com>,
	Charles Wang <muming.wq@...bao.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Seems like "sched: Add missing call to calc_load_exit_idle()"
 should be reverted in 3.5 branch

On 10/06/2012 01:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 10:10 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 15:27 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>
>>>> I'm puzzled as well.  Any ideas if I should do anything here or not?
>>>
>>> So I think the current v3.5.5 code is fine.
>>
>> Now I'm puzzled.  You wrote:
>>
>> | However, since we don't restart the tick, we won't be sampling load muck
>> | and calling calc_load_exit_idle() from there is bound to confuse state.
>>
>> Doesn't that mean 900404e5d201 "sched: Add missing call to
>> calc_load_exit_idle()" which is part of 3.5.5 was problematic?  Or
>> did I just miscount the number of "not"s?
>
>
> Argh, yeah, so now I've managed to confuse everyone I'm afraid.
>
> You are right, v3.5.5 has one calc_load_exit_idle() too many, the one in
> tick_nohz_update_jiffies() needs to go.
>
> Sorry.. I got entirely confused figuring out wth happened with 3.6.
>
High loadavg reported with v3.6, and I just checked the upstream code, 
which puzzled many people. Sorry for that~
--
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/