linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 19/33] sched/isolation: Remove HK_TYPE_TICK test from cpu_is

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: <aNJkQIO3L5SwvCbE@2a01cb069018a810e4ede1071806178f.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 11:11:28 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@...e.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/33] sched/isolation: Remove HK_TYPE_TICK test from
 cpu_is_isolated()

Le Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 05:59:12PM -0400, Waiman Long a écrit :
> 
> On 9/22/25 11:19 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Le Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 10:28:58AM -0400, Waiman Long a écrit :
> > > On 8/29/25 11:48 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > It doesn't make sense to use nohz_full without also isolating the
> > > > related CPUs from the domain topology, either through the use of
> > > > isolcpus= or cpuset isolated partitions.
> > > > 
> > > > And now HK_TYPE_DOMAIN includes all kinds of domain isolated CPUs.
> > > > 
> > > > This means that HK_TYPE_KERNEL_NOISE (of which HK_TYPE_TICK is only an
> > > > alias) is always a superset of HK_TYPE_DOMAIN.
> > > That may not be true. Users can still set "isolcpus=" and "nohz_full=" with
> > > disjoint set of CPUs whether cpuset is used for additional isolated CPUs or
> > > not.
> > There can be domain isolated CPU that are not nohz_full indeed. But OTOH nohz_full
> > CPUs that are not domain isolated don't make much sense. I know such settings
> > exist but it's usually a half working misconfiguration. I wish I had
> > forbidden that since the early days but this was from times when we didn't know
> > about all the potential usages.
> 
> The assumption is true for cpuset isolated partition, but users may still
> set conflicting nohz_full and isolcpus parameters by mistake. We should
> probably a warning if this happens and document that clearly to enforce such
> rule.

Good point, warning and documention should be a good start!

> 
> Cheers,
> Longman
> 

-- 
Frederic Weisbecker
SUSE Labs