linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 03/23] sched/core: Initialize the class of a new task

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: <YzL053SxqWUimANi@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:04:39 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc:     Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Tim C . Chen" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/23] sched/core: Initialize the class of a new task

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 02:57:29PM +0000, Joel Fernandes wrote:

> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_TASK_CLASSES
> > +	p->class			= TASK_CLASS_UNCLASSIFIED;
> > +#endif
> 
> I find the term 'class' very broad and unclear what kind of class (without
> further reading). So I am worried about how this generic term usage plays
> with Linux source code in the long-term (like what if someone else comes up
> with a usage of term 'class' that is unrelated to IPC.)

However much I like making a pain for people using C++ to compile the
kernel, I do think ipcc might be better here
(instructions_per_cycle_class for those of the novel per identifier
school of thought).

> To that end, I was wondering if it could be renamed to p->ipc_class, and
> CONFIG_SCHED_TASK_IPC_CLASSES, or something.

Can we *please* shorten those thing instead of writing a novel?
CONFIG_SCHED_IPC_CLASS works just as well, no? Or TASK_IPC, whatever.