linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] posix-cpu-timers: Don't start process wide cputime counter if timer is disabled

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: <YMnliH1u33FgsV8A@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 16 Jun 2021 13:50:32 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] posix-cpu-timers: Don't start process wide cputime
 counter if timer is disabled

On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 01:26:30PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Right, so by the time patch #5 comes around, you seem to be at the point
> where you can do:
> 
>  * fetch cputime and start threadgroup counter
> 
>  * possibly arm timer

- possibly

> 
>  * if expired:
>    - fire now
>    - if armed, disarm (which leads to stop)
> 
> Which is the other 'obvious' solution to not starting it.

So we unconditionally start and arm, and then have the early expire do
the same things as regular expire.