[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87lfg9og3b.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 01:34:32 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
io-uring@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET RFC v3 0/6] Add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
Jens,
On Tue, Oct 13 2020 at 13:39, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/12/20 11:27 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> I'm continuing to hone the series, what's really missing so far is arch
> review. Most conversions are straight forward, some I need folks to
> definitely take a look at (arm, s390). powerpc is also a bit hair right
> now, but I'm told that 5.10 will kill a TIF flag there, so that'll make
> it trivial once I rebase on that.
can you pretty please not add that to anything which is not going
through kernel/entry/ ?
The amount of duplicated and differently buggy, inconsistent and
incomplete code in syscall and exception handling is just annoying.
It's perfectly fine if we keep that #ifdeffery around for a while and
encourage arch folks to move over to the generic infrastructure instead
of proliferating the status quo by adding this to their existing pile.
The #ifdef guarding this in set_notify_signal() and other core code
places wants to be:
#if defined(CONFIG_GENERIC_ENTRY) && defined(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists