From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PF_USER_WORKERs and shadow stack
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 12:12:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250814101247.GC26754@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0e906a8a-5545-484e-9fe3-9be3e07a033a@intel.com>
On 08/13, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> On 8/13/25 12:14, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > So I'd like to ensure that ssp_active() can't return T in ssp_get().
> >
> > And... Dave, I understand that it is very easy to criticize someone else's code 😉
> > But - if I am right - the current logic doesn't look clean to me. Regardless.
>
> Hey, I'm all for having "clean" code. But if we're going to add
> complexity (aka. code) to the kernel, we should know what it's getting
> us other than "cleanliness".
>
> BTW, how many PF_USER_WORKER threads _are_ there out there? I wouldn't
> have thought that they were prevalent enough to justify much of an
> effort here.
Agreed. I'll send the patches I have in a minute. To me they don't add
too much complexity and imo they cleanup the changed code.
But! I understand that cleanups are always subjective, so please review
and share your opinion.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-14 10:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-13 16:28 PF_USER_WORKERs and shadow stack Oleg Nesterov
2025-08-13 16:41 ` Dave Hansen
2025-08-13 19:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-08-13 19:20 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-08-13 19:21 ` Dave Hansen
2025-08-14 10:12 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
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 \
--in-reply-to=20250814101247.GC26754@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.