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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 08:38:14 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> To: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com> Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, normalperson@...t.net, davidel@...ilserver.org, mtk.manpages@...il.com, luto@...capital.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Alexander Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] epoll: introduce round robin wakeup mode * Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com> wrote: > Hi, > > When we are sharing a wakeup source among multiple epoll > fds, we end up with thundering herd wakeups, since there > is currently no way to add to the wakeup source > exclusively. This series introduces a new EPOLL_ROTATE > flag to allow for round robin exclusive wakeups. > > I believe this patch series addresses the two main > concerns that were raised in prior postings. Namely, that > it affected code (and potentially performance) of the > core kernel wakeup functions, even in cases where it was > not strictly needed, and that it could lead to wakeup > starvation (since we were are no longer waking up all > waiters). It does so by adding an extra layer of > indirection, whereby waiters are attached to a 'psuedo' > epoll fd, which in turn is attached directly to the > wakeup source. > sched/wait: add __wake_up_rotate() > include/linux/wait.h | 1 + > kernel/sched/wait.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++ So the scheduler bits are looking good to me in principle, because they just add a new round-robin-rotating wakeup variant and don't disturb the others. Is there consensus on the epoll ABI changes? With Davide Libenzi inactive eventpoll appears to be without a dedicated maintainer since 2011 or so. Is there anyone who knows the code and its usages in detail and does final ABI decisions on eventpoll - Andrew, Al or Linus? Thanks, Ingo -- 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