linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] locking/rtqspinlock: Realtime queued spinlocks

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: <20170104124929.GI25813@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 13:49:29 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] locking/rtqspinlock: Realtime queued spinlocks

On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 01:00:23PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> This patchset introduces a new variant of queued spinlocks - the
> realtime queued spinlocks. The purpose of this new variant is to
> support real spinlock in a realtime environment where high priority
> RT tasks should be allowed to complete its work ASAP. This means as
> little waiting time for spinlocks as possible.
> 
> Non-RT tasks will wait for spinlocks in the MCS waiting queue as
> usual. RT tasks and interrupts will spin directly on the spinlocks
> and use the priority value in the pending byte to arbitrate who get
> the lock first.
> 
> Patch 1 removes the unused spin_lock_bh_nested() API.
> 
> Patch 2 introduces the basic realtime queued spinlocks where the
> pending byte is used for storing the priority of the highest priority
> RT task that is waiting on the spinlock. All the RT tasks will spin
> directly on the spinlock instead of waiting in the queue.
> 


OK, so a single numerical field isn't sufficient to describe priority
anymore, since we added DEADLINE support things have gotten a lot more
complex.

Also, the whole approach worries me, it has the very real possibility of
re-introducing a bunch of starvation cases avoided by the fair lock.


Is there a real problem with -RT that inspired these patches?