linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] kernel: allow to configure PREEMPT_NONE, PREEMPT

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: <20201007121939.GE2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 7 Oct 2020 14:19:39 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbecker@...e.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kernel: allow to configure PREEMPT_NONE,
 PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY on kernel command line

On Wed, Oct 07, 2020 at 02:04:01PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> 
> Many people are still relying on pre built distribution kernels and so
> distributions have to provide mutliple kernel flavors to offer different
> preemption models. Most of them are providing PREEMPT_NONE for typical
> server deployments and PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY for desktop users.

Is there actually a benefit to NONE? We were recently talking about
removing it.

The much more interesting (runtime) switch (IMO) would be between
VOLUNTARY and PREEMPT.