linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] sched: deferred set priority (dprio)

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: <CA+80gGZRxXfabODZoFMoBju=j+7+Ne8sUYaKBPzo4c9kTjL8_g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 26 Jul 2014 11:30:38 -0700
From:	Sergey Oboguev <oboguev.public@...il.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] sched: deferred set priority (dprio)

On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:58 AM, Mike Galbraith
<umgwanakikbuti@...il.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 12:45 -0700, Sergey Oboguev wrote:
>> [This is a repost of the message from few day ago, with patch file
>> inline instead of being pointed by the URL.]
>>
>> This patch is intended to improve the support for fine-grain parallel
>> applications that may sometimes need to change the priority of their threads at
>> a very high rate, hundreds or even thousands of times per scheduling timeslice.
>>
>> These are typically applications that have to execute short or very short
>> lock-holding critical or otherwise time-urgent sections of code at a very high
>> frequency and need to protect these sections with "set priority" system calls,
>> one "set priority" call to elevate current thread priority before entering the
>> critical or time-urgent section, followed by another call to downgrade thread
>> priority at the completion of the section. Due to the high frequency of
>> entering and leaving critical or time-urgent sections, the cost of these "set
>> priority" system calls may raise to a noticeable part of an application's
>> overall expended CPU time. Proposed "deferred set priority" facility allows to
>> largely eliminate the cost of these system calls.
>
> So you essentially want to ship preempt_disable() off to userspace?
>

Only to the extent preemption control is already exported to the userspace and
a task is already authorized to control its preemption by its RLIMIT_RTPRIO,
RLIMIT_NICE and capable(CAP_SYS_NICE).

DPRIO does not amplify a taks's capability to elevate its priority and block
other tasks, it just reduces the computational cost of frequest
sched_setattr(2) calls.

>
> -Mike
>
>> Instead of executing a system call to elevate its thread priority, an
>> application simply writes its desired priority level to a designated memory
>> location in the userspace. When the kernel attempts to preempt the thread...

- Sergey
--
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/