linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] time/tick-sched: idle load balancing when nohz

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]

Message-ID: <Zkdu0Guz8ySN2Qoe@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 16:50:56 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Yun Levi <ppbuk5246@...il.com>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
	Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@...byteword.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	anna-maria@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Markus.Elfring@....de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] time/tick-sched: idle load balancing when nohz_full
 cpu becomes idle.

Le Thu, May 16, 2024 at 07:53:21PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra a écrit :
> On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 05:32:56PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 05:19:53PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > > Yes, but stronger, as long as the CPU is part of a load-balance domain,
> > > it must not disable the tick while running anything.
> > > 
> > > that is, NOHZ_FULL must not become active unless it's running on a
> > > single CPU partition.
> > 
> > I like the idea but I'm afraid to introduce regressions while doing so,
> > with people currently using nohz_full without proper partionning...
> 
> There is no regression, if this is possible today it is utterly broken.
> 
> This should never have been possible.

Ok, I'll try something.

Thanks.