linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Scheduler time slice extension

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

Message-ID: <20241113185013.GA22571@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2024 19:50:13 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Prakash Sangappa <prakash.sangappa@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Scheduler time slice extension

On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 12:01:22AM +0000, Prakash Sangappa wrote:

> This patch set implements the above mentioned 50us extension time as posted
> by Peter. But instead of using restartable sequences as API to set the flag
> to request the extension, this patch proposes a new API with use of a per
> thread shared structure implementation described below. This shared structure
> is accessible in both users pace and kernel. The user thread will set the
> flag in this shared structure to request execution time extension.

But why -- we already have rseq, glibc uses it by default. Why add yet
another thing?