[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CY4PR15MB1688CE0F2139CEB72B467242CF280@CY4PR15MB1688.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:49:54 +0000
From: Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v11 for 4.15 01/24] Restartable sequences system call
(apologies for the duplicate email, the previous one bounced as it was accidentally using HTML formatting)
If I understand correctly this is run on every context switch so we probably want to make it really fast
> +static int rseq_need_restart(struct task_struct *t, uint32_t cs_flags)
> +{
> + bool need_restart = false;
> + uint32_t flags;
> +
> + /* Get thread flags. */
> + if (__get_user(flags, &t->rseq->flags))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + /* Take into account critical section flags. */
> + flags |= cs_flags;
> +
> + /*
> + * Restart on signal can only be inhibited when restart on
> + * preempt and restart on migrate are inhibited too. Otherwise,
> + * a preempted signal handler could fail to restart the prior
> + * execution context on sigreturn.
> + */
> + if (flags & RSEQ_CS_FLAG_NO_RESTART_ON_SIGNAL) {
> + if (!(flags & RSEQ_CS_FLAG_NO_RESTART_ON_MIGRATE))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (!(flags & RSEQ_CS_FLAG_NO_RESTART_ON_PREEMPT))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
How does this error even get to userspace? Is it worth doing this switch on every execution?
> + if (t->rseq_migrate
> + && !(flags & RSEQ_CS_FLAG_NO_RESTART_ON_MIGRATE))
> + need_restart = true;
> + else if (t->rseq_preempt
> + && !(flags & RSEQ_CS_FLAG_NO_RESTART_ON_PREEMPT))
> + need_restart = true;
> + else if (t->rseq_signal
> + && !(flags & RSEQ_CS_FLAG_NO_RESTART_ON_SIGNAL))
> + need_restart = true;
This could potentially be sped up by having the rseq_* fields in t use a single bitmask with the same bit offsets as RSEQ_CS_FLAG_NO_* then using bit operations to check the appropriate overlap.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists