linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] sched: move IO scheduling accounting from io_schedule_timeout() to _

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]

Date:   Sat, 29 Oct 2016 05:21:26 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Tejun Heo <htejun@...com>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
        tytso@....edu, jack@...e.com, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com, mingbo@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] sched: move IO scheduling accounting from
 io_schedule_timeout() to __schedule()

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 03:12:32PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Peter.
> 
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 09:07:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > One alternative is to inherit the iowait state of the task we block on.
> > That'll not get rid of the branches much, but it will remove the new
> > mutex APIs.
> 
> Yeah, thought about that briefly but we don't necessarily track mutex

This one I actually fixed and should be in -next. And it would be
sufficient to cover the use case here.

> or other synchronization construct owners, things get gnarly with
> rwsems (the inode ones sometimes end up in a similar situation), and
> we'll probably end up dealing with some surprising propagations down
> the line.

rwsems could be done for writers only.