linux-kernel - [PATCH v2] sched/cpuacct: Use __this_cpu_add() instead of this_cpu

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20200416082957.40691-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:29:57 +0800
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To:     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,
        mingo@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2] sched/cpuacct: Use __this_cpu_add() instead of this_cpu_ptr()

The cpuacct_charge() and cpuacct_account_field() are called with
rq->lock held, and this means preemption(and IRQs) are indeed
disabled, so it is safe to use __this_cpu_*() to allow for better
code-generation.

Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
---
Chane in v2:
    1. Update changelog.

 kernel/sched/cpuacct.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpuacct.c b/kernel/sched/cpuacct.c
index 9fbb103834345..6448b0438ffb2 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/cpuacct.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/cpuacct.c
@@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ void cpuacct_charge(struct task_struct *tsk, u64 cputime)
 	rcu_read_lock();
 
 	for (ca = task_ca(tsk); ca; ca = parent_ca(ca))
-		this_cpu_ptr(ca->cpuusage)->usages[index] += cputime;
+		__this_cpu_add(ca->cpuusage->usages[index], cputime);
 
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 }
@@ -363,7 +363,7 @@ void cpuacct_account_field(struct task_struct *tsk, int index, u64 val)
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for (ca = task_ca(tsk); ca != &root_cpuacct; ca = parent_ca(ca))
-		this_cpu_ptr(ca->cpustat)->cpustat[index] += val;
+		__this_cpu_add(ca->cpustat->cpustat[index], val);
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 }
 
-- 
2.11.0