linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rcu: Only pin GP kthread when full dynticks is actually used

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: <20140613162323.GS4581@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Jun 2014 09:23:23 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: Only pin GP kthread when full dynticks is actually
 used

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 06:09:35PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:58:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Maybe what we should do instead is to have something like this on RCU kthread init:
> > > 
> > >           cpumask_var_t gp_kthread_mask;
> > > 
> > >           if (alloc_cpumask_var(gp_kthread_mask, GFP_KERNEL))
> > >               return -EFAULT;
> > > 
> > >           cpumask_andnot(gp_kthread_mask, cpu_possible_mask, tick_nohz_full_mask);
> > > 
> > > 	  set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, gp_kthread_mask);
> > > 
> > > 	  free_cpumask_var(gp_kthread_mask);
> > 
> > I was guessing that RCU's kthreads would not be the only ones that wanted
> > similar binding.  But if you feel strongly about this, we could at least
> > start by placing it local to RCU as above.
> 
> Hmm, I don't feel well creating mirrored cpumasks (nor solely negation cpumasks in general).
> Also exposing that nohz gut is probably not a good idea either, except for RCU due to
> the sysidle stuff.
> 
> Now you're right that we can expect that this non-nohz affinity stuff is going to be reused.
> 
> Could it be housekeeping_affine(struct task_struct *tsk) maybe?

Now that you mention it, that does sound better.  I will do that.

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/