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  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]
Date:	Thu, 6 Mar 2014 12:58:25 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <>
To:	Steven Rostedt <>
Cc:	LKML <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Juri Lelli <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next] sched: Fix broken setscheduler()

On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:29:31PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I decided to run my tests on linux-next, and my wakeup_rt tracer was
> broken. After running a bisect, I found that the problem commit was:
>    linux-next commit c365c292d059
>    "sched: Consider pi boosting in setscheduler()"
> And the reason the wake_rt tracer test was failing, was because it had
> no RT task to trace. I first noticed this when running with
> sched_switch event and saw that my RT task still had normal SCHED_OTHER
> priority. Looking at the problem commit, I found:
>  -       p->normal_prio = normal_prio(p);
>  -       p->prio = rt_mutex_getprio(p);
> With no
>  +       p->normal_prio = normal_prio(p);
>  +       p->prio = rt_mutex_getprio(p);
> Reading what the commit is suppose to do, I realize that the p->prio
> can't be set if the task is boosted with a higher prio, but the
> p->normal_prio still needs to be set regardless, otherwise, when the
> task is deboosted, it wont get the new priority.
> The p->prio has to be set before "check_class_changed()" is called,
> otherwise the class wont be changed.

So Juri had a different patch for this problem:

> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <>
> ---
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 4600bca..b1cc871 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -3198,6 +3198,7 @@ static void __setscheduler_params(struct task_struct *p,
>  	 * getparam()/getattr() don't report silly values for !rt tasks.
>  	 */
>  	p->rt_priority = attr->sched_priority;
> +	p->normal_prio = normal_prio(p);
>  	set_load_weight(p);
>  }

Now; if I'm reading things right, normal_prio is the unboosted priority
of a task. And we should indeed keep setting that, otherwise the unboost
doesn't know where it should go.

Juri put that in __setscheduler(), but I think that's wrong because the
rt_mutex_check_prio() case in __sched_setscheduler() still needs to
update this.

> @@ -3207,6 +3208,8 @@ static void __setscheduler(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p,
>  {
>  	__setscheduler_params(p, attr);
> +	p->prio = rt_mutex_getprio(p);
> +
>  	if (dl_prio(p->prio))
>  		p->sched_class = &dl_sched_class;
>  	else if (rt_prio(p->prio))

And when we call this we're sure to not be boosted; so this is
effectively the same as Juri has:

  p->prio = p->normal_prio = normal_prio(p)

Seeing how rt_mutex_getprio() and normal_prio() are the same under these

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists