[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrVTpLXMLGeTOgUx2D7zzM5My5vcXV3CUH54=v8h+HWieQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 10:57:04 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
tip-bot for Andrey Ryabinin <tipbot@...or.com>,
"linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Wolfram Gloger <wmglo@...t.med.uni-muenchen.de>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:locking/urgent] compiler, atomics: Provide READ_ONCE_NOCHECK ()
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
>> > I'd still rather find a way to just delete get_wchan, but whatever.
>>
>> :-)
>
> AFAICS can only do that at the price of slowing down various scheduler functions
> by saving the caller address.
>
A quick check on my machine:
# for i in /proc/*/wchan; do cat $i && echo ''; done |sort |uniq
doesn't have very much of interest to say:
0
devtmpfsd
dmcrypt_write
do_sigtimedwait
do_wait
ep_poll
fsnotify_mark_destroy
futex_wait_queue_me
hrtimer_nanosleep
irq_thread
kauditd_thread
khugepaged
kjournald2
ksm_scan_thread
kswapd
kthreadd
pipe_wait
poll_schedule_timeout
rcu_gp_kthread
rcu_nocb_kthread
rescuer_thread
scsi_error_handler
sk_wait_data
smpboot_thread_fn
unix_stream_recvmsg
wait_woken
worker_thread
xfsaild
A bunch of those look like they're specific to kernel threads, for
which this whole mechanism is probably pointless -- just reading
/proc/PID/stack (with suitable privilege) is probably better.
For the rest, a few are useful, but I find myself wondering whether
this mechanism is really useful enough to be worth keeping. We could
just return "asleep" in /proc/PID/wchan.
A more interesting thing to do might be to try to decode regs->orig_ax
to give a guess as to which syscall is asleep. But this seems like a
lot of fiddling and a lot of worry about security issues for a
mechanism of dubious value. Also:
$ cat /proc/1/wchan
ep_poll
Why do we allow unprivileged queries like that at all?
--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