linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] sched: Rewrite select_idle

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: <20160510234230.GC4870@intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 11 May 2016 07:42:30 +0800
From:	Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, clm@...com,
	matt@...eblueprint.co.uk, mgalbraith@...e.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
	fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] sched: Rewrite select_idle_siblings()

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:00:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 05:05:50AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> > On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 12:48:12PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > +	i = select_idle_core(p, sd, target);
> > > +	if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> > > +		return i;
> > > +
> > > +	i = select_idle_cpu(p, sd, target);
> > > +	if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> > > +		return i;
> > > +
> > > +	i = select_idle_smt(p, sd, target);
> > > +	if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> > > +		return i;
> > 
> > First, on smt, these three scans have a lot of overlap,
> 
> Limited, we stop doing the idle_core scan the moment we fail to find
> one. And on a busy system it is unlikely to come back.
> 
> Which leaves us with the straight idle_cpu scan. Sure, the one time we
> fail to find an idle core and fall through we'll scan double, but that
> should be rare.

Yes, I was sorta well educated about how important finding an idle is ("one
stack, game over"), which therefore is sure worth the effort.

Looks to me, it is just about how much opportunisic-spinning should be applied
here. Great.

Do you have any suggestion about doing other part of select_task_rq_fair?