linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/deadline: add per rq tracking of admitted bandwidth

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: <20160211224819.6ff6f853@luca-1225C>
Date:	Thu, 11 Feb 2016 22:48:19 +0100
From:	Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	wanpeng.li@...mail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/deadline: add per rq tracking of admitted
 bandwidth

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 09:25:46 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:05:45 +0100
> luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it> wrote:
> 
>   
> > Well, I never used the rq utilization to re-build the root_domain
> > utilization (and I never played with root domains too much... :)...
> > So, I do not really know. Maybe the code should do:
> > 	raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
> > 	raw_spin_lock(&cpu_rq(cpu)->lock);
> 
> Of course you want to use double_rq_lock() here instead.
Right... Of course I always miss something obvious ;-)


			Luca