linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] softirq: Provide a handshake for canceling tasklets via polling on PREEMPT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250826154942.BcGs2_U5@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 17:49:42 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softirq: Provide a handshake for canceling tasklets via
 polling on PREEMPT_RT

On 2025-08-22 08:07:47 [-1000], Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Sebastian.
Hi Tejun,

> Agreed, once we get rid of them, we can drop the whole block for both RT and
> !RT - ie. revert the patch that added it. But, wouldn't it be more orderly
> to match the semantics in both cases even if the behavior isn't quite
> optimal? We can put some comment noting what to do once the culprits are
> updated to not need it.

Sure. I am only worried that if something is possible, people will use
it. I don't think things will change if we debate for another week ;)
The first patch here in this thread should provide the symmetrical API.

Oh. We could also hide this polling API behind a special API which is
hidden just for three special cases so everyone else would do the right
job.

> Thanks.

Sebastian