linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3] rcu: Add a minimum time for marking boot as completed

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: <IA1PR11MB6171ECDDD6E8E6BCC27934EB89B69@IA1PR11MB6171.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Mar 2023 08:37:06 +0000
From:   "Zhuo, Qiuxu" <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Frederic Weisbecker" <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        "rcu@...r.kernel.org" <rcu@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] rcu: Add a minimum time for marking boot as completed

> From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> [...]
> > --- a/kernel/rcu/update.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcu/update.c
> > @@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ void rcu_end_inkernel_boot(void)
> >
> >                if (boot_ms < rcu_boot_end_delay) {
> >                        schedule_delayed_work(&rcu_boot_end_work,
> > -                                       rcu_boot_end_delay - boot_ms);
> > +                               msecs_to_jiffies(rcu_boot_end_delay -
> > + boot_ms));
> >                        mutex_unlock(&rcu_boot_end_lock);
> >                        return;
> >                }
> > urezki@...38:~/data/raid0/coding/linux-rcu.git$
> > <snip>
> >
> > I think you need to apply above patch. I am not sure maybe Paul has
> > already mentioned about it. But just in case.
> 
> Ah, the reason my testing did not catch it is because for HZ=1000, msecs and
> jiffies are the same.

   So was my system :-)
   
       CONFIG_HZ_1000=y
       CONFIG_HZ=1000

-Qiuxu

> Great eyes and thank you Vlad, I’ll make the fix and repost it.
> 
>  - Joel
> 
> >
> > --
> > Uladzislau Rezki