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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 5 Apr 2018 20:08:59 +1000
From:   Nicholas Piggin <>
To:     Mike Galbraith <>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        Steven Rostedt <>
Subject: Re: sched_rt_period_timer causing large latencies

On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 10:40:20 +0200
Mike Galbraith <> wrote:

> On Thu, 2018-04-05 at 10:27 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 09:11:38AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:  
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I'm seeing some pretty big latencies on a ~idle system when a CPU wakes
> > > out of a nohz idle. Looks like it's due to the taking a lot of remote
> > > locks and cache lines. irqoff trace:  
> > 
> > On RT I think we default RT_RUNTIME_SHARE to false, maybe we should do
> > the same for mainline.  
> Probably.  My very first enterprise encounter with the thing was it NOT
> saving a box from it's not so clever driver due to that.

Well I would think a simpler per-cpu limiter might actually stand a
better chance of saving you there. Or even something attached to the
softlockup watchdog.

I'm still getting a lot of locks coming from sched_rt_period_timer
with RT_RUNTIME_SHARE false, it's just that it's now down to about
NR_CPUS locks rather than 3*NR_CPUS.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists