linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/core: Fix reset-on-fork from RT with uclamp

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:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 12:32:18 -0400
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To:     Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
        ctheegal@...eaurora.org, dianders@...omium.org,
        patrick.bellasi@...bug.net, valentin.schneider@....com,
        qais.yousef@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/core: Fix reset-on-fork from RT with uclamp

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:27:13PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 Apr 2020 at 12:21:28 (-0400), Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > Shouldn't this be conditional on p->sched_reset_on_fork instead of deleting
> > the code?
> 
> Right, it's not obvious from the diff, but this code _is_ conditional on
> p->sched_reset_on_fork already. This is what the whole function looks
> like with my patch applied:
> 
> ---8<---
> static void uclamp_fork(struct task_struct *p)
> {
>         enum uclamp_id clamp_id;
> 
>         for_each_clamp_id(clamp_id)
>                 p->uclamp[clamp_id].active = false;
> 
>         if (likely(!p->sched_reset_on_fork))
>                 return;
> 
>         for_each_clamp_id(clamp_id) {
>                 unsigned int clamp_value = uclamp_none(clamp_id);
> 
>                 uclamp_se_set(&p->uclamp_req[clamp_id], clamp_value, false);
>         }

Oh ok, thanks for clarification.

 - Joel


> }
> --->8---
> 
> Thanks,
> Quentin