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  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:   Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:44:32 +0000
From:   xiaoggchen(陈小光) <>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <>,
        "" <>
CC:     "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        heddchen(陈贺) <>
Subject: 答复: [PATCH] sched: don't check rq after newidle_balance return positive(Internet mail)

发件人: Peter Zijlstra <> 
发送时间: 2020年12月15日 16:33
抄送:;;;;;;;;; heddchen(陈贺) <>; xiaoggchen(陈小光) <>
主题: Re: [PATCH] sched: don't check rq after newidle_balance return positive(Internet mail)

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 02:48:50PM +0800, wrote:
>> From: Chen Xiaoguang <>
>> In pick_next_task_fair, if CPU is going to idle newidle_balance is 
>> called first trying to pull some tasks.
>> When newidle_balance returns positive which means it does pulls tasks 
>> or some tasks enqueued then there is no need to check 
>> sched_fair_runnable again.

> No, I think it actually does need to, because while it counts the number of tasks it pulled, it doesn't verify it still has them after it re-acquires rq->lock. That is, someone could've come along and stolen them 
> right from under our noses.
Ah, yes, our change only make sense when pulling nothing in load_balance but some tasks enqueued this rq during the lock of this rq is released.

>> Signed-off-by: He Chen <>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiaoguang Chen <>

> This SoB chain is broken. The first SoB should be the author, but From does not match.
We will fix this next time.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists