linux-kernel - lttng and full nohz

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

Message-ID: <CA+xJJ1-2zHMjV3AFiprRjChEff=Bynj4uK_1wL6vKVR=H-T8Bg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:25:07 +0200
From:	Mats Liljegren <liljegren.mats2@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: lttng and full nohz

I've been investigating why lttng destroys full nohz mode, and the
root cause is that lttng uses timers for flushing trace buffers. So
I'm planning on moving the timers to the ticking CPU, so that any CPU
using full nohz mode can continue to do so even though they might have
tracepoints.

I can see that kernel/sched/core.c has the function
get_nohz_timer_target() which tries to find an idle CPU to allocate
for a timer that has not specified a CPU to be pinned to.

My question here is: For full nohz mode, should this still be "only"
an idle CPU, or should it be translated to a CPU not running in full
nohz mode? I'd think this could make it a lot easier to allow
applications to make full use of full nohz.

/Mats
--
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/