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: <CA+55aFygPtKM0fOGu1HNdZ9TCgk5hJ3r78fX03KYUT=0npPiEw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Jan 2018 09:26:07 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
        Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Radu Rendec <rrendec@...sta.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] softirq: Defer net rx/tx processing to ksoftirqd context

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:13 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 06:23:08AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>
>> How would that be better than what RT used to do, and I still do for my
>> RT kernels via boot option, namely split ksoftirqd into per-softirq
>> threads.
>
> Since we mention it; one of the problems RT has is that all RX is
> through a single softirq context, which generates a priority inversion
> between devices.

Oh, yes, that is complete and utter shit. Not acceptable at all.

As mentioned, it really would need to be per-cpu _and_ per-softirq.

Which is why I thought workqueues might be the thing. Whatever RT is
doing is  apparently just pure and utter garbage.

             Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ