linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/2] tick/nohz: Fix wrong NOHZ idle CPU state

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

Message-ID: <8fcea325-ca5f-0abd-34e0-1ac7b092e2fb@gentwo.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 08:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" <cl@...two.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
cc: Adam Li <adamli@...amperecomputing.com>, anna-maria@...utronix.de, 
    tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, 
    juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, vschneid@...hat.com, 
    dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, 
    mgorman@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...erecomputing.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/2] tick/nohz: Fix wrong NOHZ idle CPU state

On Fri, 5 Sep 2025, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> isolcpus for domain isolation is indeed in the way for long term deprecation
> and the only replacement possible is cpuset, which overhead is only visible
> on partition creation and update.
>
> We could argue on the interface, the point is that nohz_full doesn't make sense
> without domain isolation.

Most use cases I see use nohz_full on all cpus and rely on the OS to
exempt the sheperd cpu.