[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <yt9do8ke4seh.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 12:00:06 +0100
From: Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
oleg@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
Hi Jens,
Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>>
>> Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
>> ---
>>
>> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting
>> for details:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/
>>
>> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs,
>> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm
>> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the
>> arch tree. Let me know.
>>
>> arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++
>> arch/s390/kernel/entry.S | 7 ++++++-
>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>> #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control block */
>> #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */
>> #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */
>> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */
>> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */
>>
>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>> #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>>
>> #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>> #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
>> #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
>> #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
>> STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
>>
>> _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
>> - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
>> + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
>> + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>> _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
>> _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
>> _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
>> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>> #endif
>> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart
>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>> + jo .Lsysc_sigpending
>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>> jo .Lsysc_sigpending
>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>> #endif
>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>> jo .Lio_sigpending
>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>> + jo .Lio_sigpending
>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>> jo .Lio_notify_resume
>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
>
> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below).
>
> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that:
>
> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
> #endif
> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart
> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> - jo .Lsysc_sigpending
> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
> jo .Lsysc_sigpending
We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means
'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one
bit is set'
> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
> jo .Lsysc_notify_resume
> @@ -858,9 +856,7 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING
> jo .Lio_patch_pending
> #endif
> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> - jo .Lio_sigpending
> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
Same here.
> jo .Lio_sigpending
> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
> jo .Lio_notify_resume
PS: I didn't get the previous emails, so i replied to a raw download
from marc.info. Not sure whether Threading will work out.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists