linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched/cpuset: Fix DL BW accounting in case can

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: <ZBwc4l0ZyyRQPiSP@localhost.localdomain>
Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 2023 10:33:22 +0100
From:   Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
To:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>,
        Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it>,
        Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>, Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched/cpuset: Fix DL BW accounting in case
 can_attach() fails

Hi,

On 22/03/23 14:59, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> I followed Longman's idea to add a `deadline task transfer count` into
> cpuset and only update the `dl task count` in cpuset_attach().
> 
> Moreover, I switched from per-task DL BW request to a per-cpuset one.
> This way we don't have to free per-task in case xxx_can_attach() fails.
> 
> The DL BW freeing is handled in cpuset_cancel_attach() for the case
> `multiple controllers and one of the non-cpuset can_attach() fails`.
> 
> Only lightly tested on cgroup v1 with exclusive cpusets so far.

This makes sense to me. Thanks for working on it!

Guess I might incorporate these in my (RFC) series and re-post the whole
lot?

Best,
Juri