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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 10:19:54 -0700 From: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com, fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu] Do not keep timekeeping CPU tick running for non-nohz_full= CPUs On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 09:53:50AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > If a non-nohz_full= CPU is non-idle, it will have a scheduling-clock > interrupt, and therefore doesn't need the timekeeping CPU to keep > its scheduling-clock interrupt going. This commit therefore ignores > the idle state of non-nohz_full CPUs when determining whether or not > the timekeeping CPU can safely turn off its scheduling-clock interrupt. > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > index ddad959a9132..eaa32e4c228d 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > @@ -2789,8 +2789,13 @@ static void rcu_sysidle_exit(struct rcu_dynticks *rdtp, int irq) > * system-idle state. This means that the timekeeping CPU must > * invoke rcu_sysidle_force_exit() directly if it does anything > * more than take a scheduling-clock interrupt. > + * > + * In addition if we are not a nohz_full= CPU, then when we are > + * non-idle we have our own tick, so we don't need the timekeeping > + * CPU to keep a tick on our behalf. We assume that the timekeeping > + * CPU is also a nohz_full= CPU. > */ > - if (smp_processor_id() == tick_do_timer_cpu) > + if (!tick_nohz_full_cpu(smp_processor_id())) > return; > > /* Update system-idle state: We are clearly no longer fully idle! */ > @@ -2810,11 +2815,11 @@ static void rcu_sysidle_check_cpu(struct rcu_data *rdp, bool *isidle, > > /* > * If some other CPU has already reported non-idle, if this is > - * not the flavor of RCU that tracks sysidle state, or if this > - * is an offline or the timekeeping CPU, nothing to do. > + * not the flavor of RCU that tracks sysidle state, or if this is > + * an offline or !nohz_full= or the timekeeping CPU, nothing to do. > */ > if (!*isidle || rdp->rsp != rcu_sysidle_state || > - cpu_is_offline(rdp->cpu) || rdp->cpu == tick_do_timer_cpu) > + cpu_is_offline(rdp->cpu) || !tick_nohz_full_cpu(rdp->cpu)) > return; > if (rcu_gp_in_progress(rdp->rsp)) > WARN_ON_ONCE(smp_processor_id() != tick_do_timer_cpu); > -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists