linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/7 v3] sched: fix wrong utilization accounting when switching to fair class

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: <xm261t0beu85.fsf@bsegall-linux.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Sep 2016 10:10:18 -0700
From:   bsegall@...gle.com
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
        Linaro Kernel Mailman List <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7 v3] sched: fix wrong utilization accounting when switching to fair class

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:

> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:59:08AM -0700, bsegall@...gle.com wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:
>> > Google has this patch-set replacing min_vruntime with an actual global
>> > 0-lag, which greatly simplifies things. If only they'd post it sometime
>> > :/ /me prods pjt and ben with a sharp stick :-)
>> >
>> 
>> No, we don't have any patches like that. I wish, we've screwed up
>> vruntime a couple of times too.
>
> Hurm, I was sure you guys were doing something entirely different from
> what mainline does.
>
> IIRC Andrew Hunter was 'working' on getting that posted. See also:
> lkml.kernel.org/r/CADroS=6Ncpao6WWXBxboB6quqUP96EnjbsDUZqNgASd_PzDGaA@...l.gmail.com

Oh, I was looking at the wrong branches. Sigh.

Yeah, we just do an unlocked "se->vruntime -= old->min_vruntime -
new->min_vruntime;" in migrate, and remove/add it in
switched_from/switched_to_fair.

This still isn't replacing min_vruntime with anything cool, perhaps you
and Andrew were using opposite definitions of relative here - we have
fair tasks always having a vruntime that is relative to min_vruntime,
rather than temporarily having the 0-based one when doing
non-SLEEP/WAKEUP.