[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160429201822.rj5hbkfkjgrdxlz6@treble>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 15:18:22 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Chris J Arges <chris.j.arges@...onical.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 09/18] livepatch/x86: add TIF_PATCH_PENDING thread
flag
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 11:08:04AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > Add the TIF_PATCH_PENDING thread flag to enable the new livepatch
> > per-task consistency model for x86_64. The bit getting set indicates
> > the thread has a pending patch which needs to be applied when the thread
> > exits the kernel.
> >
> > The bit is placed in the least-significant word of the thread_info flags
>
> NAK to that part.
>
> The least-significant word thing is a huge hack that has gotten out of
> control. Please add the thing explicitly to all relevant masks.
Yeah, it is quite dangerous. I'll make it explicit, and make all the
other _TIF_ALLWORK_MASK flags explicit while I'm at it.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists