linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched,fair: Fix local starvation

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: <CANRm+CwmtRXSch0DSok+pKs=LzCHQayMy5PBObNtAx_d7m9jQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 22 May 2016 15:27:18 +0800
From:	Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
	Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched,fair: Fix local starvation

2016-05-22 15:15 GMT+08:00 Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>:
> On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 14:50 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> 2016-05-21 22:04 GMT+08:00 Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>:
>> > On Tue, 2016-05-10 at 19:43 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> >
>> > (Evolution authors must either not do patch review, or use some other
>> > mailer.  Squint hard, this crud really is your patch;)
>> >
>> > > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
>> > > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
>> > >
>> > > @@ -1762,7 +1770,11 @@ void sched_ttwu_pending(void)
>> > >  >    > while (llist) {
>> > >  >    >       > p = llist_entry(llist, struct task_struct, wake_entry);
>> > >  >    >       > llist = llist_next(llist);
>> > > ->    >       > ttwu_do_activate(rq, p, 0, cookie);
>> > > +>    >       > /*
>> > > +>    >       >  * See ttwu_queue(); we only call ttwu_queue_remote() when
>> > > +>    >       >  * its a x-cpu wakeup.
>> > > +>    >       >  */
>> > > +>    >       > ttwu_do_activate(rq, p, WF_MIGRATED, cookie);
>> >
>> > Wakees that were not migrated/normalized eat an unwanted min_vruntime,
>>
>> Why there were wakees queued by twu_queue_remote() not migrated?
>
> Queuing to a remote cache domain implies x-cpu wakeup, but does not
> imply migration.

What's the meaning of 'x-cpu wakeup'? ;-)

Regards,
Wanpeng Li