linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] sync a se with its cfs

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: <20150820083841.GH24261@byungchulpark-X58A-UD3R>
Date:	Thu, 20 Aug 2015 17:38:41 +0900
From:	Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yuyang.du@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] sync a se with its cfs_rq when att(det)aching it

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 03:17:21AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> I did something like this on top.. please have a look at the XXX and
> integrate.

i am not sure, what do you intend for me to do.

do you mean that i am supposed to integrate this cleanup patch you gave me
including the XXX comment?

> +	 *
> +	 * XXX this appears wrong!! check history, 
> +	 * we appear to always set queued and RUNNING under the same lock instance
> +	 * might be from before TASK_WAKING ?
>  	 */

is it impossible to happen to check if vruntime is normalized, when doing
something like e.g. active load balance where queued != TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED
and p->state == TASK_RUNNING?

i think it can happen..

thanks,
byungchul
--
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/