linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] sched: Fix wakeup preemption regression

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: <20160512105235.GC2728@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date:	Thu, 12 May 2016 11:52:35 +0100
From:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, byungchul.park@....com,
	Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] sched: Fix wakeup preemption regression

On Tue, 10 May, at 07:43:14PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> A recent commit caused an interactivity/starvation issue because we wrecked rq
> local wakeup preemption.
> 
> These patches rectify this while also (hopefully) keeping the problem that led
> to the fault patch fixed.
> 
> Mike, Pavan, could you guys please confirm?
 
FWIW, I took a quick look over these patches and they made sense to
me. (I appreciate the comment block above enqueue_entity())