[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Ym/e4CrxwV3HlsJj@linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 15:38:40 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net, oleg@...hat.com,
mingo@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mgorman@...e.de,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, tj@...nel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/12] ptrace: cleaning up ptrace_stop
On 2022-04-29 16:46:59 [-0500], Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> The states TASK_STOPPED and TASK_TRACE are special in they can not
> handle spurious wake-ups. This plus actively depending upon and
> changing the value of tsk->__state causes problems for PREEMPT_RT and
> Peter's freezer rewrite.
PREEMPT_RT wise, I had to duct tape wait_task_inactive() and remove the
preempt-disable section in ptrace_stop() (like previously). This reduces
the amount of __state + saved_state checks and looks otherwise stable in
light testing.
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists