linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4] psi: fix possible trigger missing in the window

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: <YgpwwZvTU/llBMeC@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 14 Feb 2022 16:09:53 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Huangzhaoyang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>,
        Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] psi: fix possible trigger missing in the window

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:05:37AM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 02:56:58PM +0800, Huangzhaoyang wrote:
> > From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
> > 
> > When a new threshold breaching stall happens after a psi event was
> > generated and within the window duration, the new event is not
> > generated because the events are rate-limited to one per window. If
> > after that no new stall is recorded then the event will not be
> > generated even after rate-limiting duration has passed. This is
> > happening because with no new stall, window_update will not be called
> > even though threshold was previously breached. To fix this, record
> > threshold breaching occurrence and generate the event once window
> > duration is passed.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
> 
> Hey Peter, would you mind taking this through the scheduler tree? It's
> got my and Suren's acks. It's not a recent regression so I'm thinking
> for 5.18 is fine. Thanks!

Sorry, missed it, got it now. Thanks!