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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:02:55 +0200 From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com> Subject: Re: sched: Reenable interrupts in do sched_yield() On Tue, Oct 20 2020 at 11:38, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:46:55 +0200 > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote: > >> - /* >> - * Since we are going to call schedule() anyway, there's >> - * no need to preempt or enable interrupts: > > I think the above comment still makes sense, just needs to be tweeked: > > /* > * Since we are going to call schedule() anyway, there's > * no need to allow preemption after releasing the rq lock. >> - */ > > Especially, since we are now enabling interrupts, which is likely to > trigger a preemption. sched_preempt_enable_no_resched() still enables preemption. It just avoids the check. And it still allows preemption when an interrupt triggering preemption happens between sched_preempt_enable_no_resched() and __schedule() disabling preemption/interrupts. So no, your new variant is just differently bogus and misleading. Thanks, tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists