linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] sched: Extended scheduler time slice

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

Message-Id: <9DA1FAE6-A008-4785-BDF9-541457E29807@joelfernandes.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 19:56:09 -0500
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: Prakash Sangappa <prakash.sangappa@...cle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 x86@...nel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, luto@...nel.org,
 bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com,
 juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, willy@...radead.org,
 mgorman@...e.de, jon.grimm@....com, bharata@....com, raghavendra.kt@....com,
 Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
 Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, jgross@...e.com,
 Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com, Vineeth Pillai <vineethrp@...gle.com>,
 Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
 Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 Clark Williams <clark.williams@...il.com>, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
 daniel.wagner@...e.com, Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@...cle.com>,
 broonie@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] sched: Extended scheduler time slice



> On Feb 4, 2025, at 5:44 PM, Prakash Sangappa <prakash.sangappa@...cle.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Feb 1, 2025, at 10:11 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 07:47:32AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On February 1, 2025 6:59:06 AM EST, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I still have full hate for this approach.
>>> 
>>> So what approach would you prefer?
>> 
>> The one that does not rely on the preemption method -- I think I posted
>> something along those line, and someone else recently reposted something
>> bsaed on it.
> 
> Here is the RFC I had sent that Peter is referring

FWIW, I second the idea of a new syscall for this than (ab)using rseq
and also independence from preemption method. I agree that something
generic is better than relying on preemption method.

thanks,

 - Joel




> Tying things to the preemption method is absurdly bad design -- and I've
>> told you that before.
>> 
>