linux-kernel - [tip:sched/core] sched: Pull resched loop to _

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]

Date:	Wed, 4 Feb 2015 06:36:30 -0800
From:	tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker <tipbot@...or.com>
To:	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	fweisbec@...il.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, peterz@...radead.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com
Subject: [tip:sched/core] sched: Pull resched loop to __schedule() callers

Commit-ID:  bfd9b2b5f80e7289fdd50210afe4d9ca5952a865
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/bfd9b2b5f80e7289fdd50210afe4d9ca5952a865
Author:     Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
AuthorDate: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 01:24:09 +0100
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CommitDate: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 07:52:30 +0100

sched: Pull resched loop to __schedule() callers

__schedule() disables preemption during its job and re-enables it
afterward without doing a preemption check to avoid recursion.

But if an event happens after the context switch which requires
rescheduling, we need to check again if a task of a higher priority
needs the CPU. A preempt irq can raise such a situation. To handle that,
__schedule() loops on need_resched().

But preempt_schedule_*() functions, which call __schedule(), also loop
on need_resched() to handle missed preempt irqs. Hence we end up with
the same loop happening twice.

Lets simplify that by attributing the need_resched() loop responsibility
to all __schedule() callers.

There is a risk that the outer loop now handles reschedules that used
to be handled by the inner loop with the added overhead of caller details
(inc/dec of PREEMPT_ACTIVE, irq save/restore) but assuming those inner
rescheduling loop weren't too frequent, this shouldn't matter. Especially
since the whole preemption path is now losing one loop in any case.

Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1422404652-29067-2-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c | 11 +++++++----
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 5091fd4..b269e8a 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2765,6 +2765,10 @@ again:
  *          - explicit schedule() call
  *          - return from syscall or exception to user-space
  *          - return from interrupt-handler to user-space
+ *
+ * WARNING: all callers must re-check need_resched() afterward and reschedule
+ * accordingly in case an event triggered the need for rescheduling (such as
+ * an interrupt waking up a task) while preemption was disabled in __schedule().
  */
 static void __sched __schedule(void)
 {
@@ -2773,7 +2777,6 @@ static void __sched __schedule(void)
 	struct rq *rq;
 	int cpu;
 
-need_resched:
 	preempt_disable();
 	cpu = smp_processor_id();
 	rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
@@ -2840,8 +2843,6 @@ need_resched:
 	post_schedule(rq);
 
 	sched_preempt_enable_no_resched();
-	if (need_resched())
-		goto need_resched;
 }
 
 static inline void sched_submit_work(struct task_struct *tsk)
@@ -2861,7 +2862,9 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __sched schedule(void)
 	struct task_struct *tsk = current;
 
 	sched_submit_work(tsk);
-	__schedule();
+	do {
+		__schedule();
+	} while (need_resched());
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(schedule);
 
--
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/