linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V6 2/6] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 10:45:04 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>,
	Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
	Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@...byteword.org>,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
	Youssef Esmat <youssefesmat@...gle.com>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 2/6] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server

On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 10:35:02AM +0200, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> On 4/10/24 19:47, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> +static enum hrtimer_restart dl_server_timer(struct hrtimer *timer, struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se)
> >> +{
> >> +	struct rq *rq = rq_of_dl_se(dl_se);
> >> +	enum hrtimer_restart restart = 0;
> >> +	struct rq_flags rf;
> >> +	u64 fw;
> >> +
> >> +	rq_lock(rq, &rf);
> > 	guard(rq_lock)(rq, &rf);
> 
> this is the way I found to get the &rf... inspired on sched_rr_get_interval():
> 
>         scoped_guard (rq_lock, rq) {
>                 struct rq_flags *rf = &scope.rf;
> 
> is that right?
> 
Yeah, it's a bit ugly, but yes.