linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] sched: Lazy preemption muck

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: <20241009062019.1FJYnQL1@linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 08:20:19 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
	mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.com, efault@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] sched: Lazy preemption muck

On 2024-10-08 21:40:05 [-0700], Ankur Arora wrote:
> > While comparing this vs what I have:
> > - need_resched()
> >   It checked both (tif_need_resched_lazy() || tif_need_resched()) while
> >   now it only looks at tif_need_resched().
> >   Also ensured that raw_irqentry_exit_cond_resched() does not trigger on
> >   lazy.
> >   I guess you can argue both ways what makes sense, just noting…
> 
> I think we want need_resched() to be only tif_need_resched(). That way
> preemption in lazy mode *only* happens at the user mode boundary.

There are places such as __clear_extent_bit() or select_collect() where
need_resched() is checked and if 0 they loop again. For these kind of
users it would probably make sense to allow them to preempt themself.
We could also add a new function which checks both and audit all users
and check what would make sense base on $criteria.

Sebastian