linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 11/11] nohz,kvm,time: teach account_process

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, 24 Jun 2015 08:06:49 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	fweisbec@...hat.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 11/11] nohz,kvm,time: teach account_process_tick about
 guest time

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 7:58 AM,  <riel@...hat.com> wrote:
> From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
>
> When tick based accounting is run from a remote CPU, it is actually
> possible to encounter a task with PF_VCPU set. Make sure to account
> those as guest time.

Why do we have PF_VCPU and CONTEXT_GUEST?  What's the difference
between them (other than the fact that one is per-task and one is
per-cpu)?  It would be a bit easier to understand if there were fewer
of these things.

If the issue is that remote sampling would otherwise have a race that
could account guest time to the wrong task, then maybe PF_VCPU makes
sense.  Hmm.

--Andy
--
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/