linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] sched/deadline: Use return value of SCHED_WARN

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: <20190726121819.32be6fb1@sweethome>
Date:   Fri, 26 Jul 2019 12:18:19 +0200
From:   luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>
To:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <Valentin.Schneider@....com>,
        Qais Yousef <Qais.Yousef@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] sched/deadline: Use return value of SCHED_WARN_ON()
 in bw accounting

Hi Dietmar,

On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:27:56 +0100
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> wrote:

> To make the decision whether to set rq or running bw to 0 in underflow
> case use the return value of SCHED_WARN_ON() rather than an extra if
> condition.

I think I tried this at some point, but if I remember well this
solution does not work correctly when SCHED_DEBUG is not enabled.



			Luca


> 
> Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/deadline.c | 6 ++----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> index a9cb52ceb761..66c594b5507e 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> @@ -95,8 +95,7 @@ void __sub_running_bw(u64 dl_bw, struct dl_rq
> *dl_rq) 
>  	lockdep_assert_held(&(rq_of_dl_rq(dl_rq))->lock);
>  	dl_rq->running_bw -= dl_bw;
> -	SCHED_WARN_ON(dl_rq->running_bw > old); /* underflow */
> -	if (dl_rq->running_bw > old)
> +	if (SCHED_WARN_ON(dl_rq->running_bw > old)) /* underflow */
>  		dl_rq->running_bw = 0;
>  	/* kick cpufreq (see the comment in kernel/sched/sched.h). */
>  	cpufreq_update_util(rq_of_dl_rq(dl_rq), 0);
> @@ -119,8 +118,7 @@ void __sub_rq_bw(u64 dl_bw, struct dl_rq *dl_rq)
>  
>  	lockdep_assert_held(&(rq_of_dl_rq(dl_rq))->lock);
>  	dl_rq->this_bw -= dl_bw;
> -	SCHED_WARN_ON(dl_rq->this_bw > old); /* underflow */
> -	if (dl_rq->this_bw > old)
> +	if (SCHED_WARN_ON(dl_rq->this_bw > old)) /* underflow */
>  		dl_rq->this_bw = 0;
>  	SCHED_WARN_ON(dl_rq->running_bw > dl_rq->this_bw);
>  }