linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] sched: introduce synchronized idle injection

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: <20151110170010.GH17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:00:10 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>,
	Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@....com>,
	Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] sched: introduce synchronized idle injection

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 08:50:55AM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 17:36:46 +0100
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > > The downside is that we need to restart the timers every time if
> > > user were to change injection parameters, i.e. duration and percent.
> > > Or do locking which might be too expensive. In the previous
> > > approach, it will naturally catch up the parameter change.  
> > 
> > Why? the timer will fire and observe the new value for reprogramming
> > the next period. All you need to do is to ensure whole values are
> > written/read -- ie. avoid load/store tearing.
> Different per CPU timer may intercept parameter changes at slightly
> different time, so there is a race condition such that some CPUs may
> catch the period change later by one period, which results in a correct
> period change but at a different time, i.e. out of sync.

Ah yes. So if the locking hurts I can come up with a lockless algorithm
for this. Shouldn't be too hard.
--
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/