linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched: Optimize !CONFIG_NO_HZ

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: <20160408125521.GC24956@lerouge>
Date:	Fri, 8 Apr 2016 14:55:22 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched: Optimize !CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON cpu load updates

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 12:48:21PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:07:13AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > index 4c522a7..59a2821 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -7327,8 +7327,9 @@ void __init sched_init(void)
> >  
> >  		for (j = 0; j < CPU_LOAD_IDX_MAX; j++)
> >  			rq->cpu_load[j] = 0;
> > -
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
> >  		rq->last_load_update_tick = jiffies;
> > +#endif
> >  
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >  		rq->sd = NULL;
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index 1dd864d..4618e5b 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -4661,8 +4680,10 @@ static inline void cpu_load_update_nohz(struct rq *this_rq,
> >  
> >  static void cpu_load_update_periodic(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long load)
> >  {
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
> >  	/* See the mess around cpu_load_update_nohz(). */
> >  	this_rq->last_load_update_tick = READ_ONCE(jiffies);
> > +#endif
> >  	cpu_load_update(this_rq, load, 1);
> >  }
> >  
> 
> Here you do the simple #ifdef, while here you make a giant mess instead
> of the relatively straight forward:
> 
> > @@ -4540,17 +4568,8 @@ static void cpu_load_update(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long this_load,
> >  
> >  		/* scale is effectively 1 << i now, and >> i divides by scale */
> >  
> > -		old_load = this_rq->cpu_load[i];
> #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
> > -		old_load = decay_load_missed(old_load, pending_updates - 1, i);
> > -		if (tickless_load) {
> > -			old_load -= decay_load_missed(tickless_load, pending_updates - 1, i);
> > -			/*
> > -			 * old_load can never be a negative value because a
> > -			 * decayed tickless_load cannot be greater than the
> > -			 * original tickless_load.
> > -			 */
> > -			old_load += tickless_load;
> > -		}
> #endif

Ah sure, if you prefer it that way, I can do that.

Thanks.