linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] v5.10-rc2-rt4

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 12 Nov 2020 14:54:46 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] v5.10-rc2-rt4

On 2020-11-12 13:39:02 [+0100], Daniel Wagner wrote:
> With the current version signaltest + your test patch and 'taskset -c1'
> the results looks good again, around 230us (running since 2 hours). I've
> tested first without taskset and it took about an half hour to hit
> 350us. So pinning the threads on one CPU fixes it.

okay. So case closed.

> I think we change signaltest to use the correct affinity on
> default. Also, I see that sigwaittest has some code for it, but it, but
> it would be a good idea to set the defaults so that out of the box the
> test does the right thing.

Sounds reasonable. Having tasks jumping from one CPU to another may lead
to higher latencies.

> I'm sorry about dragging you into this problem.
I feared that something in lazy preempt or signal stack is broken. But
it appears not to be the case :)

Sebastian