linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 1/6] Sched: 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20250520162035.7855e94c@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 16:20:35 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Prakash Sangappa <prakash.sangappa@...cle.com>
Cc: Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@...ux.ibm.com>, "peterz@...radead.org"
 <peterz@...radead.org>, "mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com"
 <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, "tglx@...utronix.de"
 <tglx@...utronix.de>, "bigeasy@...utronix.de" <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
 "kprateek.nayak@....com" <kprateek.nayak@....com>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/6] Sched: Scheduler time slice extension

On Tue, 20 May 2025 16:52:20 +0000
Prakash Sangappa <prakash.sangappa@...cle.com> wrote:

> But the thread has to make the sched_yied() call. The behavior of which
> will be different if called in the extended time vs not. Assume this is ok.

I assume it is ;-)

That's because the only time user space should ever call sched_yield() in
an extended time slice is because it wants to tell the kernel it doesn't
need it anymore. If that's not the case, that means one it's using the
extended time slice and calling sched_yield() for some other reason, which
doesn't make any sense.

-- Steve