linux-kernel - Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT

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]

Date:   Wed, 20 Sep 2023 09:32:38 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, luto@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com,
        juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, mgorman@...e.de,
        jon.grimm@....com, bharata@....com, raghavendra.kt@....com,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
        jgross@...e.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, Brian Cain <bcain@...cinc.com>,
        linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org,
        Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@...aro.org>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT


* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Sep 2023 20:31:50 +0200
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> 
> > The removal of cond_resched() might cause latencies, but then I doubt
> > that these museus pieces are used for real work :)
> 
> We could simply leave the cond_resched() around but defined as nops for
> everything but the "nostalgia club" to keep them from having any regressions.

That's not a good idea IMO, it's an invitation for accelerated rate bitrot 
turning cond_resched() meaningless very quickly.

We should remove cond_resched() - but probably not as the first step. They 
are conceptually independent of NEED_RESCHED_LAZY and we don't *have to* 
remove them straight away.

By removing cond_resched() separately there's an easily bisectable point to 
blame for any longer latencies on legacy platforms, should any of them 
still be used with recent kernels.

Thanks,

	Ingo