[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161013234147.GB24167@remoulade>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 00:41:47 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/core,x86: make struct thread_info arch
specific again
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 01:57:10PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> commit c65eacbe290b ("sched/core: Allow putting thread_info into
> task_struct") made struct thread_info a generic struct with only a
> single flags member if THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK_STRUCT is selected.
>
> This change however seems to be quite x86 centric, since at least the
> generic preemption code (asm-generic/preempt.h) assumes that struct
> thread_info also has a preempt_count member, which apparently was not
> true for x86.
>
> We could add a bit more ifdefs to solve this problem too, but it seems
> to be much simpler to make struct thread_info arch specific
> again. This also makes the conversion to THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK_STRUCT a
> bit easier for architectures that have a couple of arch specific stuff
> in their thread_info definition.
>
> The arch specific stuff _could_ be moved to thread_struct. However
> keeping them in thread_info makes it easier: accessing thread_info
> members is simple, since it is at the beginning of the task_struct,
> while the thread_struct is at the end. At least on s390 the offsets
> needed to access members of the thread_struct (with task_struct as
> base) are too large for various asm instructions. This is not a
> problem when keeping these members within thread_info.
The exact same applies for arm64 on all counts. This is also simpler than both
attempts I had at this, so FWIW:
Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To make merging less painful, I guess we'll need a stable branch with (just)
this and whatever patch we end up with for fixing current_thread_info(), so we
can independently merge the arch-specific parts.
I guess it'd make sense for the tip tree to host that?
Thanks,
Mark.
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h | 9 +++++++++
> include/linux/thread_info.h | 11 -----------
> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> index 2aaca53c0974..ad6f5eb07a95 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -52,6 +52,15 @@ struct task_struct;
> #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
> #include <linux/atomic.h>
>
> +struct thread_info {
> + unsigned long flags; /* low level flags */
> +};
> +
> +#define INIT_THREAD_INFO(tsk) \
> +{ \
> + .flags = 0, \
> +}
> +
> #define init_stack (init_thread_union.stack)
>
> #else /* !__ASSEMBLY__ */
> diff --git a/include/linux/thread_info.h b/include/linux/thread_info.h
> index 45f004e9cc59..2873baf5372a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/thread_info.h
> +++ b/include/linux/thread_info.h
> @@ -14,17 +14,6 @@ struct timespec;
> struct compat_timespec;
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK
> -struct thread_info {
> - unsigned long flags; /* low level flags */
> -};
> -
> -#define INIT_THREAD_INFO(tsk) \
> -{ \
> - .flags = 0, \
> -}
> -#endif
> -
> -#ifdef CONFIG_THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK
> #define current_thread_info() ((struct thread_info *)current)
> #endif
>
> --
> 2.8.4
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists