linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tick/nohz: Narrow down noise while setting current task's tick dependency

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:   Sun, 17 May 2020 08:53:22 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tick/nohz: Narrow down noise while setting current
 task's tick dependency

On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 03:31:16PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 08:07:18PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 02:34:29AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > So far setting a tick dependency on any task, including current, used to
> > > trigger an IPI to all CPUs. That's of course suboptimal but it wasn't
> > > an issue as long as it was only used by posix-cpu-timers on nohz_full,
> > > a combo that nobody seemed to use in real life.
> > > 
> > > But RCU started to use task tick dependency on current task to fix
> > > stall issues on callbacks processing. These trigger regular and
> > > undesired system wide IPIs on nohz_full.
> > > 
> > > The fix is very easy while setting a tick dependency on the current
> > > task, only its CPU needs an IPI.
> > 
> > This passes moderate rcutorture testing.  If you want me to take it, please
> > let me know, and otherwise:
> > 
> > Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> 
> If you already have a pending urgent queue, I'd love you to take it.
> If not I can take it.

Nothing urgent yet in -rcu, so if you would like it in the next merge
window, please take it through your normal upstream path.

							Thanx, Paul