linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 12/17] sched: A quick and dirty cgroup tagging interface

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: <20190426141915.GC16477@lorien.usersys.redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Apr 2019 10:19:15 -0400
From:   Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Vineeth Remanan Pillai <vpillai@...italocean.com>,
        Nishanth Aravamudan <naravamudan@...italocean.com>,
        Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@...italocean.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, mingo@...nel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, pjt@...gle.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com,
        fweisbec@...il.com, keescook@...omium.org, kerrnel@...gle.com,
        Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@...il.com>,
        Aubrey Li <aubrey.intel@...il.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 12/17] sched: A quick and dirty cgroup tagging
 interface

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 04:13:07PM +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 10:26:53AM -0400, Phil Auld wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > index e8e5f26db052..b312ea1e28a4 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -7541,6 +7541,9 @@ static int cpu_core_tag_write_u64(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css, struct cftype
> >         if (val > 1)
> >                 return -ERANGE;
> >  
> > +       if (num_online_cpus() <= 1) 
> > +               return -EINVAL;
> 
> We actually know if there SMT on the system or not, which is much better
> indication still:
> 
> 	if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_smt_present))
> 		return -EINVAL;
> 
> >         if (tg->tagged == !!val)
> >                 return 0;
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 

Yeah, I thought there was probably a better check.

Thanks!

--