linux-kernel - Re: [linus:master] [x86] 4817f70c25: stress-ng.mmapaddr.ops_per

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: <Z5pj96aFQU-PTtGf@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2025 18:23:03 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
	Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
	kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev,
	lkp@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
	Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	Zach O'Keefe <zokeefe@...gle.com>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [x86] 4817f70c25: stress-ng.mmapaddr.ops_per_sec
 63.0% regression

Le Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 11:57:19AM -0500, Rik van Riel a écrit :
> On Wed, 2025-01-29 at 17:53 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Le Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 08:36:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney a écrit :
> > > 
> > > So it won't prevent RCU callbacks from being invoked.
> > > 
> > > It *will* ensure that only a finite number of RCU callbacks get
> > > invoked.
> > > For some perhaps rather large value of "finite".
> > > 
> > > Does that help, or is more required?
> > 
> > I don't fully understand the issue either but would spin_lock_bh()
> > help?
> 
> Was that a jinx, or an ack to that latest patch? ;)

Probably both :-)

> 
> -- 
> All Rights Reversed.