[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <da84a2a7-f94a-d0aa-14e0-3925f758aa0e@kernel.dk>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:31:23 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, oleg@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] x86: wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
On 10/15/20 8:11 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15 2020 at 07:17, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
>> @@ -808,7 +808,10 @@ void arch_do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long ti_work)
>> {
>> struct ksignal ksig;
>>
>> - if (get_signal(&ksig)) {
>> + if (ti_work & _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>> + tracehook_notify_signal();
>> +
>> + if ((ti_work & _TIF_SIGPENDING) && get_signal(&ksig)) {
>> /* Whee! Actually deliver the signal. */
>> handle_signal(&ksig, regs);
>> return;
>
> Instead of adding this to every architectures signal magic, we can
> handle TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL in the core code:
>
> static void handle_singal_work(ti_work, regs)
> {
> if (ti_work & _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
> tracehook_notify_signal();
>
> arch_do_signal(ti_work, regs);
> }
>
> loop {
> if (ti_work & (SIGPENDING | NOTIFY_SIGNAL))
> handle_signal_work(ti_work, regs);
> }
We could, should probably make it:
static void handle_signal_work(ti_work, regs)
{
if (ti_work & _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
tracehook_notify_signal();
if (ti_work & _TIF_SIGPENDING)
arch_do_signal(regs);
}
and then we can skip modifying arch_do_signal() all together, as it'll
only be called if _TIF_SIGPENDING is set.
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists