linux-kernel - Re: Question about sched

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]

Date:   Mon, 13 May 2019 10:10:52 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>, joelaf@...gle.com,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Question about sched_setaffinity()

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 04:07:42PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > The below trace explain the issue. Some Paul person did it, see below.
> > It's broken per construction :-)
> 
> *facepalm*  Hence the very strange ->cpus_allowed mask.  I really
> should have figured that one out.

I guess it's called a torture framework for a reason ;-)