public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>, Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] task_work: use TIF_TASKWORK if available
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:52:24 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

On 10/2/20 9:31 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 02 2020 at 17:14, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> Heh. To be honest I don't really like 1-2 ;)
> 
> I do not like any of this :)
> 
>> So I think that if we are going to add TIF_TASKWORK we should generalize
>> this logic and turn it into TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL. Similar to TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>> but implies signal_pending().
>>
>> IOW, something like
>>
>> 	void set_notify_signal(task)
>> 	{
>> 		if (!test_and_set_tsk_thread_flag(task, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)) {
>> 			if (!wake_up_state(task, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE))
>> 				kick_process(t);
>> 		}
>> 	}
>>
>> 	// called by exit_to_user_mode_loop() if ti_work & _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>> 	void tracehook_notify_signal(regs)
>> 	{
>> 		clear_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL);
>> 		smp_mb__after_atomic();
>> 		if (unlikely(current->task_works))
>> 			task_work_run();
>> 	}
>>
>> This way task_work_run() doesn't need to clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL and it can
>> have more users.
> 
> I think it's fundamentaly wrong that we have several places and several
> flags which handle task_work_run() instead of having exactly one place
> and one flag.

I don't disagree with that. I know it's not happening in this series, but
if we to the TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL route and get all archs supporting that,
then we can kill the signal and notify resume part of running task_work.
And that leaves us with exactly one place that runs it.

So we can potentially improve the current situation in that regard.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-10-02 15:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-01 19:42 [PATCHSET RFC 0/3] kernel: decouple TASK_WORK TWA_SIGNAL handling from signals Jens Axboe
2020-10-01 19:42 ` [PATCH 1/3] kernel: add task_sigpending() helper Jens Axboe
2020-10-01 19:42 ` [PATCH 2/3] kernel: decouple TASK_WORK TWA_SIGNAL handling from signals Jens Axboe
2020-10-01 19:42 ` [PATCH 3/3] task_work: use TIF_TASKWORK if available Jens Axboe
2020-10-02 15:14   ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-10-02 15:31     ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-10-02 15:38       ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-10-02 16:18         ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-03  1:49         ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-10-03 15:35           ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-02 15:52       ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-10-02 16:42         ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-02 19:10         ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-10-02 20:14           ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-02 15:53     ` Jens Axboe

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox