linux-kernel - Re: [Query]: tick-sched: why don't we stop tick when we are running idle task?

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

Message-ID: <20140415105332.GM13658@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:53:32 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [Query]: tick-sched: why don't we stop tick when we are running
 idle task?

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 12:52:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:30:04AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > There is probably a few things that assume local calls but last time
> > I checked I had the impression that it was fairly possible to call sched_class::task_tick()
> > remotely. rq is locked, no reference to "current", use rq accessors...
> > 
> > OTOH scheduler_tick() itself definetly requires local calls.
> 
> possible isn't the problem, its completely insane to do that.

What's more, I'm still waiting to hear why we're wanting to do any of
this.
--
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/