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

Date:	Sat, 13 Oct 2012 11:39:37 +0800 (CST)
From:	陈华才 <chenhc@...ote.com>
To:	"Charles Wang" <muming.wq@...il.com>
Cc:	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"Jonathan Nieder" <jrnieder@...il.com>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"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

So I still think that "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/