linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V7 4/4] softirq: Allow early break the softirq processing loop

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: <20200928092249.GC2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 28 Sep 2020 11:22:49 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     qianjun.kernel@...il.com
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, will@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laoar.shao@...il.com,
        qais.yousef@....com, urezki@...il.com,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 4/4] softirq: Allow early break the softirq processing
 loop

On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:56:09PM +0800, qianjun.kernel@...il.com wrote:
> +/*
> + * The pending_next_bit is recorded for the next processing order when
> + * the loop is broken. This per cpu variable is to solve the following
> + * scenarios:

This, that adds all that complexity, and I think it's wrong. The
softirqs are priority ordered. Running then again from 0 up if/when you
break seems 'right'.