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]

Date:   Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:37:30 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.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>,
        Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
        Brian Cain <bcain@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kernel: allow to configure PREEMPT_NONE,
 PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY on kernel command line

On Fri 09-10-20 12:14:31, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:10:44PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 09-10-20 11:42:45, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 11:12:18AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > Is there any additional feedback? Should I split up the patch and repost
> > > > for inclusion?
> > > 
> > > Maybe remove PREEMPT_NONE after that?  Since that's then equivalent to
> > > building with VOLUNTARY and booting with preempt=none.
> > 
> > So do you mean that I should post an additional patch which does this on
> > top? With a justification that there is one option less to chose from?
> 
> Exactly!

It seems we have to get rid of CONFIG_NO_PREEMPT first
$ git grep ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
arch/Kconfig:config ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
arch/alpha/Kconfig:     select ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
arch/hexagon/Kconfig:   select ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
arch/m68k/Kconfig:      select ARCH_NO_PREEMPT if !COLDFIRE
arch/um/Kconfig:        select ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
kernel/Kconfig.preempt: depends on !ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
kernel/Kconfig.preempt: depends on !ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
lib/Kconfig.debug:      select PREEMPT_COUNT if !ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
lib/Kconfig.debug:      depends on !ARCH_NO_PREEMPT

Is there anybody working on that. Is this even possible? I can see it
has been added by 87a4c375995e ("kconfig: include kernel/Kconfig.preempt
from init/Kconfig") but this looks more like a mechanical change and it
has defined ARCH_NO_PREEMPT all arches which haven't included
Kconfig.preempt. But is there any reason why those cannot support
preemption for some reason? Cc respective maintainer (the email thread
starts http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201007120401.11200-1-mhocko@kernel.org
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs