linux-kernel - [PATCH 1/5] sched/fair: ignore SIS

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]

Date:   Tue, 12 Jul 2022 16:20:32 +0800
From:   Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] sched/fair: ignore SIS_UTIL when has idle core

When SIS_UTIL is enabled, SIS domain scan will be skipped if
the LLC is overloaded. Since the overloaded status is checked
in the load balancing at LLC level, the interval is llc_size
miliseconds. The duration might be long enough to affect the
overall system throughput if idle cores are out of reach in
SIS domain scan.

Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 15 +++++++++------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index a78d2e3b9d49..cd758b3616bd 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -6392,16 +6392,19 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, bool
 	struct sched_domain *this_sd;
 	u64 time = 0;
 
-	this_sd = rcu_dereference(*this_cpu_ptr(&sd_llc));
-	if (!this_sd)
-		return -1;
-
 	cpumask_and(cpus, sched_domain_span(sd), p->cpus_ptr);
 
-	if (sched_feat(SIS_PROP) && !has_idle_core) {
+	if (has_idle_core)
+		goto scan;
+
+	if (sched_feat(SIS_PROP)) {
 		u64 avg_cost, avg_idle, span_avg;
 		unsigned long now = jiffies;
 
+		this_sd = rcu_dereference(*this_cpu_ptr(&sd_llc));
+		if (!this_sd)
+			return -1;
+
 		/*
 		 * If we're busy, the assumption that the last idle period
 		 * predicts the future is flawed; age away the remaining
@@ -6436,7 +6439,7 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, bool
 				return -1;
 		}
 	}
-
+scan:
 	for_each_cpu_wrap(cpu, cpus, target + 1) {
 		if (has_idle_core) {
 			i = select_idle_core(p, cpu, cpus, &idle_cpu);
-- 
2.31.1