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:   Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:41:37 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Christian Eggers <ceggers@...i.de>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sched: system doesn't boot since  "sched: Add new
 migrate_disable() implementation"

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 01:38:28PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2020-10-20 13:30:09 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 05:09:35PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > On 2020-10-19 12:21:06 [+0200], Christian Eggers wrote:
> > > > I have problems with the latest 5.9-rt releases on i.MX6ULL (!CONFIG_SMP):
> > > > 
> > > …
> > > > Any hints?
> > > 
> > > Thank you for the report. The reason is the migrate_disable()
> > > implementation for !SMP.
> > 
> > This should fix things I suppose. I'll fold it in.
> 
> It will. It will also break lazy-preemption. Each time a sleeping lock
> is acquired there is also migrate_disable() and the migrate-disable
> counter is != 0 (even for UP). The result is that a wake up for a
> SCHED_OTHER task with mg counter != 0 will not lead to context switch
> (same like preemption counter != 0). The difference is that a wake up
> for a RT task ignores this counter and perform a context switch anyway.

Right, but this patch set doesn't include the lazy preemption stuff, and
given the 'fun' Valentin and me are still having with it, I'd like to
keep it like that.

But yes, that might warrant a slightly less NOP implementation.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ