linux-kernel - [v4.8-rc1 Regression] sched/fair: Apply more PELT fixes

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <57F7F9AF.2010609@canonical.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 Oct 2016 15:38:23 -0400
From:   Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@...onical.com>
To:     peterz@...radead.org
Cc:     torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, efault@....de, tglx@...utronix.de,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, mingo@...nel.org
Subject: [v4.8-rc1 Regression] sched/fair: Apply more PELT fixes

Hello Peter,

A kernel bug report was opened against Ubuntu [0].  After a kernel
bisect, it was found that reverting the following commit resolved this bug:

commit 3d30544f02120b884bba2a9466c87dba980e3be5
Author: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Date:   Tue Jun 21 14:27:50 2016 +0200

    sched/fair: Apply more PELT fixes

The regression was introduced as of v4.8-rc1.  The bug can be reproduced
on an X1 Carbon with the following:
stress -c $your_total_cpu_cores

I was hoping to get your feedback, since you are the patch author.  Do
you think gathering any additional data will help diagnose this issue,
or would it be best to submit a revert request? 

Thanks,

Joe

[0] http://pad.lv/1627108