linux-kernel - Re: sched: Reenable interrupts in do sched

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: <87h7qo6ntx.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:27:22 +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 16:07, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:02:55 +0200
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> What I wrote wasn't exactly what I meant. What I meant to have:
>
> 	/*
> 	 * Since we are going to call schedule() anyways, there's
> 	 * no need to do the preemption check when the rq_lock is released.
> 	 */
>
> That is, to document why we have the preempt_disable() before the unlock:

which is pretty obvious, but I let Peter decide on that.