linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] sched: Add NOHZ_STATS

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: <20171222082915.4lcb7xyyooqyjpia@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Fri, 22 Dec 2017 09:29:15 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Brendan Jackman <brendan.jackman@....com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] sched: Add NOHZ_STATS_KICK

On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 09:05:45AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 22 December 2017 at 08:59, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 05:56:32PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> >> In fact, we can't only rely on the tick and newly_idle load balance to
> >> ensure a period update of the blocked load because they can never
> >> happen.
> >
> > I'm confused, why would the ilb not happen?
> 
> the ilb will be kick only if tick fires which might not be the case
> for task that runs less than a tick

Oh, urgh, you're talking about when the entire system is idle. Yes
indeed.

Lemme have a think, surely we can do something saner there.