linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] EXP rcu: Move expedited grace period (GP) work to RT kthread

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: <20220408113946.056c083e@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Fri, 8 Apr 2022 11:39:46 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc:     Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>, Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>,
        Kyle Lin <kylelin@...gle.com>,
        Chunwei Lu <chunweilu@...gle.com>,
        Lulu Wang <luluw@...gle.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        rcu <rcu@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] EXP rcu: Move expedited grace period (GP) work to RT
 kthread_worker

On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 06:21:03 -0400
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org> wrote:

> > +       default !PREEMPT_RT && NR_CPUS <= 32  
> 
> What is the benefit of turning it off on PREEMPT_RT, even if
> PREEMPT_RT does not use expedited GPs much post-boot? I would think in
> the future if PREEMPT_RT ever uses expedited GPs, they would want this
> feature even more. I'd rather be future-proof now as I don't see any
> advantages of disabling it on !PREEMPT_RT (And a drawback that the fix
> won't apply to those systems). Also will keep the config simple.

The default kthread priority is 1. This should not affect PREEMPT_RT, as
PREEMPT_RT users are usually more concerned by the performance of their
higher priority tasks. Priority 1 is not considered an issue.

I do not see why PREEMPT_RT is special here. Why was it singled out?

-- Steve