[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a9b1dde0-7c29-41c3-99be-4749281e25ea@igalia.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 11:28:27 -0300
From: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, sonicadvance1@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-dev@...lia.com,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Vinicius Peixoto <vpeixoto@...amp.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] futex: Create set_robust_list2
Em 17/12/2024 17:31, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 02:49:55PM -0300, André Almeida wrote:
>> This patch adds a new robust_list() syscall. The current syscall
>> can't be expanded to cover the following use case, so a new one is
>> needed. This new syscall allows users to set multiple robust lists per
>> process and to have either 32bit or 64bit pointers in the list.
>
> Last time a whole list of short comings of the current robust scheme
> were laid bare. I feel we should address all that if we're going to
> create a new scheme.
>
Are you talking about [1] or is there something else?
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87jzdjxjj8.fsf@oldenburg3.str.redhat.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists