linux-kernel - Re: [patch 04/50] sched: Rework the _

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b079e04a-c3f9-af01-91c3-91e952f0bf6d@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Jul 2021 16:04:03 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: Re: [patch 04/50] sched: Rework the __schedule() preempt argument

On 7/13/21 11:10 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>
> PREEMPT_RT needs to hand a special state into __schedule() when a task
> blocks on a 'sleeping' spin/rwlock. This is required to handle
> rcu_note_context_switch() correctly without having special casing in the
> RCU code. From an RCU point of view the blocking on the sleeping spinlock
> is equivalent to preemption because the task might be in a read side
> critical section.
>
> schedule_debug() also has a check which would trigger with the !preempt
> case, but that could be handled differently.
>
> To avoid adding another argument and extra checks which cannot be optimized
> out by the compiler the following solution has been chosen:
>
>   - Replace the boolean 'preempt' argument with an unsigned integer
>     'sched_mode' argument and define constants to hand in:
>     (0 == No preemption, 1 = preemption).
>
>   - Add two masks to apply on that mode one for the debug/rcu invocations
>     and one for the actual scheduling decision.
>
>     For a non RT kernel these masks are UINT_MAX, i.e. all bits are set
>     which allows the compiler to optimze the AND operation out because it is
>     not masking out anything. IOW, it's not different from the boolean.
>
>     RT enabled kernels will define these masks seperately.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> ---
>   kernel/sched/core.c |   36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>   1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> ---
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -5822,6 +5822,20 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct tas
>   #endif /* CONFIG_SCHED_CORE */
>   
>   /*
> + * Constants for the sched_mode argument of __schedule().
> + *
> + * The mode argument allows RT enabled kernels to differentiate a
> + * preemption from blocking on an 'sleeping' spin/rwlock by having seperate
> + * mask values for SM_MASK_PREEMPT and SM_MASK_STATE while on a non RT
> + * enabled kernel the masks have all bits set which allows the compiler to
> + * optimize the AND operation out.
> + */
> +#define	SM_NONE			0x0
> +#define	SM_PREEMPT		0x1
> +#define SM_MASK_PREEMPT		UINT_MAX
> +#define SM_MASK_STATE		SM_MASK_PREEMPT

Nit: Inconsistent use of space/tab after #define.

Cheers,
Longman