linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: No need to check NULL later

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 6 Apr 2016 21:08:02 +0800
From:	Xunlei Pang <xpang@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: No need to check NULL later_mask

On 2016/04/06 at 17:30, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 06:14:28PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>> Your proposal is very nice!
>>
>> At the sched_init() stage we only have one (to be "idle") task and with irq disabled,
>> no scheduling will happen, and the cpu_possible_mask was already initiated, so it's
>> safe to simply move them there.
>>
>> Also, how about rt&deadline sharing a percpu mask? Because only one of them can
>> use the mask at a moment, operations are always under some spin_lock_irqsave().
>>
>> I made a new patch below, slightly tested by running tens of rt&dl tasks for a while,
>> are you fine with it?
> Yep, looks fine. Please submit as a proper patch.

Will do, thanks!

Regards,
Xunlei

>
> Thanks!