linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 1/7] Track the active utilisation

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:	Tue, 5 Apr 2016 18:47:29 +0200
From:	luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/7] Track the active utilisation

Hi Peter,

first of all, thanks for all the reviews!

On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 14:23:27 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -1218,6 +1242,9 @@ static void task_dead_dl(struct task_struct *p)
> >  	/* XXX we should retain the bw until 0-lag */
> >  	dl_b->total_bw -= p->dl.dl_bw;
> >  	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&dl_b->lock);
> > +
> > +	if (task_on_rq_queued(p))
> > +		sub_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl);
> >  }
> >  
> 
> A dead task cannot be running, not be queued, right? ISTR you remove
> this hunk in a later patch as well.
I suspect this is some "better safe than sorry" code I added trying
to solve some issue that then I solved in a different way... But I
forgot to remove it.

I'll fix the patch and re-test.



			Thanks,
				Luca