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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 23:07:48 +0100 From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>, rafael@...nel.org, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, len.brown@...el.com Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/2] sched/core: Check and schedule ksoftirq On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 12:19:34PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 10:42:59AM -0800, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote: > > + /* Give ksoftirqd 1 jiffy to get a chance to start its job */ > > + if (!READ_ONCE(it.done) && task_is_running(__this_cpu_read(ksoftirqd))) { > > + __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); > > + schedule_timeout(1); > > + } > > That's absolutely disgusting :-/ I know, and I hate checking task_is_running(__this_cpu_read(ksoftirqd)) everywhere in idle. And in fact it doesn't work because some cpuidle drivers also do need_resched() checks. I guess that either we assume that the idle injection is more important than serving softirqs and we shutdown the warnings accordingly, or we arrange for idle injection to have a lower prio than ksoftirqd. Thoughts?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists