[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXtYV5xKkTxothuqNb7ra80Be7ZXJ-hDnC6p-bfEPZ=Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:27:42 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Richard Larocque <rlarocque@...gle.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, filbranden@...gle.com,
md@...gle.com, gthelen@...gle.com, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/vdso: Add prctl to set per-process VDSO load
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Richard Larocque <rlarocque@...gle.com> wrote:
> Adds new prctl calls to enable or disable VDSO loading for a process
> and its children.
>
> The PR_SET_DISABLE_VDSO call takes one argument, which is interpreted as
> a boolean value. If true, it disables the loading of the VDSO on exec()
> for this process and any children created after this call. A false
> value unsets the flag.
>
> The PR_GET_DISABLE_VDSO option returns a non-negative true value if VDSO
> loading has been disabled for this process, zero if it has not been
> disabled, and a negative value in case of error.
>
> These prctl calls are hidden behind a new Kconfig,
> CONFIG_VDSO_DISABLE_PRCTL. This feature is available only on x86.
>
> The command line option vdso=0 overrides the behavior of
> PR_SET_DISABLE_VDSO, however, PR_GET_DISABLE_VDSO will coninue to return
> whetever setting was last set with PR_SET_DISABLE_VDSO.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Larocque <rlarocque@...gle.com>
> ---
> This patch is part of some work to better handle times and CRIU migration.
> I suspect that there are other use cases out there, so I'm offering this
> patch separately.
>
> When considering CRIU migration and times, we put some thought into how
> to handle the rdtsc instruction. If we migrate between machines or across
> reboots, the migrated process will see values that could break its assumptions
> about how rdtsc is supposed to work.
I don't get it.
If __vdso_clock_gettime returns the wrong value in any scenario, we
should fix that. Simiarly, CRIU *already works*, unless there's
something I don't know of.
That being said, I would like an option to gate off RDTSC for a
process and its children in order to make PR_TSC_SIGSEGV more useful.
All the prerequisites are there now.
What problem are you trying to solve exactly?
--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists