linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] tracing: Introduce faultable tracepoints

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:   Tue, 21 Nov 2023 08:46:28 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Michael Jeanson <mjeanson@...icios.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] tracing: Introduce faultable tracepoints

On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 05:03:00PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 07:58:40AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> 
> > Tasks Trace RCU allows general blocking in its readers, not just the
> > subject-to-priority-boosting blocking permitted within preemptible RCU
> > readers.  Restrictions on the use of Tasks Trace RCU are in place to allow
> > getting away with this general blocking.  Even systems generously endowed
> > with memory are not going to do well when the RCU grace period is blocked
> > on I/O, especially if that I/O is across a network to a slow file server.
> > 
> > Which means a separate RCU instance is needed.  Which is Tasks Trace RCU.
> 
> Separate instance not a problem, nor really the question.
> 
> What is the basic mechanism of task-tracing? Is it really the existing
> tasks-rcu extended with read-side critical sections and call_rcu ?
> 
> If so, then why not have it be tasks-rcu?
> 
> Or is it a variant of the preemptible/SRCU class of RCUs that are
> counter-array based? I suspect not.
> 
> So once again, what exactly is tasks-tracing ?

I think we covered this elsewhere in the thread, but if there are
lingering questions, you know where to find us.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul