linux-kernel - Re: rcu: Avoid irq disable in rcu_cpu

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

Message-ID: <00000142dd1c5d5c-e95b9eb8-e27a-4de7-b301-becee6402c4e-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:24:53 +0000
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: rcu: Avoid irq disable in rcu_cpu_kthread

On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 09:06:55PM +0000, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > Once we have the per cpu patchset merged we could do the following [it
> > even works without that patchset but the __this_cpu ops will not do
> > preemption checks]. Would this work?
>
> Looks plausible at first glance.  But are you really seeing performance
> issues with this code?  It is only compiled into the kernel when you build
> with CONFIG_RCU_BOOST=y -- are you actually using that for your workloads?

I have not done any benchmarking. Just looking for more use cases for the
this_cpu ops. There is a lot of use of per cpu operations in the rcu code
which seems to be areas in which these operations can help.

--
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/