[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87v8zyyz4x.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 09:13:18 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
Cc: "Sang, Oliver" <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"lkp@...ts.01.org" <lkp@...ts.01.org>, lkp <lkp@...el.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"Tang, Feng" <feng.tang@...el.com>,
"zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com" <zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com>,
"Yin, Fengwei" <fengwei.yin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [x86/signal] 3aac3ebea0: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -11.9%
regression
On Wed, Dec 08 2021 at 10:20, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/8/21 10:00 AM, Bae, Chang Seok wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
>> index a629b11bf3e0..8194d2f38bf1 100644
>> --- a/kernel/signal.c
>> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
>> @@ -4224,6 +4224,11 @@ int restore_altstack(const stack_t __user *uss)
>> stack_t new;
>> if (copy_from_user(&new, uss, sizeof(stack_t)))
>> return -EFAULT;
>> + if (current->sas_ss_sp == (unsigned long) new.ss_sp &&
>> + current->sas_ss_size == new.ss_size &&
>> + current->sas_ss_flags == new.ss_flags)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> (void)do_sigaltstack(&new, NULL, current_user_stack_pointer(),
>> MINSIGSTKSZ);
>> /* squash all but EFAULT for now */
>
> This seems like a generally good optimization that could go in
> do_sigaltstack() itself, no?
Yes, right before the sigaltstack_lock() invocation.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists