linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 7/7] sched/fair: alternative way of accounting throttle time

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250508094342.177ddf4d@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 09:43:42 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc: Aaron Lu <ziqianlu@...edance.com>, Florian Bezdeka
 <florian.bezdeka@...mens.com>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
 <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, Ben
 Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>, Ingo
 Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Xi
 Wang <xii@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Juri Lelli
 <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Mel
 Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@...ux.dev>, Chuyi
 Zhou <zhouchuyi@...edance.com>, Clark Williams <clark.williams@...il.com>,
 daniel.wagner@...e.com, josephtsalisbury@...il.com, lgoncalv@...hat.com,
 Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...nel.org>, williams@...hat.com, dwagner@...e.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 7/7] sched/fair: alternative way of accounting
 throttle time

On Thu, 8 May 2025 08:13:39 +0200
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:

> On 08.05.25 04:45, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 11:33:42AM +0200, Florian Bezdeka wrote:  
> >> To sum up: This series fixes (or seems to fix, let's wait for one more
> >> week to be sure) a critical RT issue. Is there a chance that once we
> >> made it into mainline that we see (official) backports? 6.12 or 6.1
> >> would be nice.  
> > 
> > I don't think there will be official backports if this series entered
> > mainline because stable kernels only take fixes while this series changed
> > throttle behavior dramatically. Of course, this is just my personal
> > view, and the maintainer will make the final decision.  
> 
> With 6.12 carrying RT in-tree and this patches serious fixing a hard
> lock-up of that configuration, a backport to 6.12-stable would be
> required IMHO. Backports beyond that should be a topic for the
> (separate) rt-stable trees.
>

Agreed, and I'm adding the stable RT maintainers as well in case this needs
to go earlier than 6.12.

Thanks,

-- Steve