[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <65f643c0-6ac0-a88f-6822-c95d17c83a9f@au1.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:29:57 +1000
From: Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>
To: "Alastair D'Silva" <alastair@....ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
mikey@...ling.org, vaibhav@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, malat@...ian.org,
felix@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, pombredanne@...b.com,
sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, npiggin@...il.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, arnd@...db.de,
fbarrat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, corbet@....net,
"Alastair D'Silva" <alastair@...ilva.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] powerpc: use task_pid_nr() for TID allocation
On 11/05/18 16:12, Alastair D'Silva wrote:
> From: Alastair D'Silva <alastair@...ilva.org>
>
> The current implementation of TID allocation, using a global IDR, may
> result in an errant process starving the system of available TIDs.
> Instead, use task_pid_nr(), as mentioned by the original author. The
> scenario described which prevented it's use is not applicable, as
> set_thread_tidr can only be called after the task struct has been
> populated.
>
> In the unlikely event that 2 threads share the TID and are waiting,
> all potential outcomes have been determined safe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alastair D'Silva <alastair@...ilva.org>
Thanks for the clarifying comment. The diff is painful to read but I
think it makes sense :)
Reviewed-by: Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>
--
Andrew Donnellan OzLabs, ADL Canberra
andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com IBM Australia Limited
Powered by blists - more mailing lists