linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] Backport rework of deadline bandwidth restoration for 6.1.y

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: <2023082140-dreaded-hemstitch-84b9@gregkh>
Date:   Mon, 21 Aug 2023 15:26:03 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
        John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Backport rework of deadline bandwidth restoration
 for 6.1.y

On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 04:24:11PM +0100, Qais Yousef wrote:
> This is a backport of the series that fixes the way deadline bandwidth
> restoration is done which is causing noticeable delay on resume path. It also
> converts the cpuset lock back into a mutex which some users on Android too.
> I lack the details but AFAIU the read/write semaphore was slower on high
> contention.
> 
> Compile tested against some randconfig for different archs and tested against
> android14-6.1 GKI kernel.
> 
> My testing is limited to resume path only; and general phone usage to make sure
> nothing falls apart. Would be good to have some deadline specific testing done
> too.
> 
> Based on v6.1.46

I can't take these for only some branches, as you know.  Any reason why
you didn't also do 6.4.y?

thanks,

greg k-h