linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] sched, numa: Ignore pinned tasks

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: <20150518130050.GA2934@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 May 2015 18:30:50 +0530
From:	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, riel@...hat.com, dedekind1@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mgorman@...e.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	juri.lelli@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] sched, numa: Ignore pinned tasks

>  
>  static void account_numa_dequeue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>  {
> +	if (p->nr_cpus_allowed == 1) {
> +		rq->nr_pinned_running--;
> +		WARN_ON_ONCE(p->numa_preferred_nid != -1);
> +	}
>  	rq->nr_numa_running -= (p->numa_preferred_nid != -1);
>  	rq->nr_preferred_running -= (p->numa_preferred_nid == task_node(p));
>  }


Shouldnt we reset p->numa_preferred_nid when we are setting the allowed
cpus in set_cpus_allowed_common()? 

Otherwise if an process is set a preferred node based on its numa faults
but then is pinned to a different cpu, then we can see this warning.:w!


-- 
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju

--
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/