linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 2/7] Correctly track the active utilisation for migrating tasks

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: <20160405185059.3195ab87@utopia>
Date:	Tue, 5 Apr 2016 18:50:59 +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 2/7] Correctly track the active utilisation for
 migrating tasks

On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 14:24:25 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -1618,7 +1620,9 @@ static void pull_dl_task(struct rq *this_rq)
> >  			resched = true;
> >  
> >  			deactivate_task(src_rq, p, 0);
> > +			sub_running_bw(&p->dl, &src_rq->dl);
> >  			set_task_cpu(p, this_cpu);
> > +			add_running_bw(&p->dl, &this_rq->dl);
> >  			activate_task(this_rq, p, 0);
> >  			dmin = p->dl.deadline;
> >  
> 
> Are these the only places a DL task might be migrated from? In
> particular I worry about the case where we assign an existing DL task to
> a different cpuset.
I was under the impression that these (+ the select_task_rq_dl() thing)
covered all of the migration cases... But I was probably wrong: now that
you say this, I realise that I never tested moving dl tasks between
different cpusets.

I'll test that, and fix the patch if some new issue appears.



				Thanks,
					Luca