linux-kernel - Re: [POC][RFC][PATCH v2] sched: Extended Scheduler Time Slice

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: <ce0dbdaf-6be4-4f3b-9b5a-aedeac00ddf6@efficios.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Oct 2023 08:56:50 -0400
From:   Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>, 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, willy@...radead.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,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Youssef Esmat <youssefesmat@...omium.org>,
        Vineeth Pillai <vineethrp@...gle.com>,
        Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [POC][RFC][PATCH v2] sched: Extended Scheduler Time Slice

On 2023-10-27 12:49, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 12:35:56 -0400
> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
> 
>>> Does that make more sense?
>>
>> Not really.
>>
>> Please see my other email about the need for a reference count here, for
>> nested locks use-cases.
> 
> Note, my original implementation of nested locking was done completely in
> user space.
> 
> int __thread lock_cnt;
> 
> extend() {
> 	if (lock_cnt++)
> 		return;
> 	...
> }
> 
> unextend() {
> 	if (--lock_cnt)
> 		return;
> 	...
> }

This only works if "your" lock implementation is the only user of this 
RSEQ feature within a process. RSEQ requires that multiple libraries can 
share the facilities. Therefore, the rseq field should include the 
nesting counter as part of the RSEQ ABI so various userspace libraries 
can use it collaboratively.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com