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]
Date:	Mon, 29 Feb 2016 07:19:13 -0800
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies"

On lun., 2016-02-29 at 07:03 -0800, Peter Hurley wrote:

> Not the case. The softirq is raised from interrupt.
> 
> Before Eric's change, when an interrupt raises a new softirq
> while processing another softirq, the new softirq is immediately
> processed *after the existing softirq completes*.
> 
> After Eric's change, when an interrupt raises a new softirq
> while processing another softirq and _that softirq wakes a process_,
> the new softirq is *deferred to normal process priority*.

For the last time, this is not true.

My patch changed the probability for this to happen.

It will happen even if you revert it.

linux never claimed that softirq could steal all cpu time.

Are by any chance still running a HZ=100 kernel ?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ