From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH glibc 1/4] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation (v4) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 19:55:07 +0100 Message-ID: <87fttv9iic.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> References: <20181204192141.4684-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <87h8fkz6qx.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <1681283664.1380.1547152315426.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1681283664.1380.1547152315426.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (Mathieu Desnoyers's message of "Thu, 10 Jan 2019 15:31:55 -0500 (EST)") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: carlos , Joseph Myers , Szabolcs Nagy , libc-alpha , Thomas Gleixner , Ben Maurer , Peter Zijlstra , "Paul E. McKenney" , Boqun Feng , Will Deacon , Dave Watson , Paul Turner , Rich Felker , linux-kernel , linux-api List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org * Mathieu Desnoyers: > Therefore, both symbols will end up in > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/Versions. I'm not sure what you mean by that. The physical location in the directory tree has little effect on which shared object the symbol is placed in; that will need other changes. >> By the way, you could avoid the need for unregistration if you allocated >> the rseq areas persistently, index by TID. They are quite small, so >> with the typical PID range, maybe the wasted memory due to changing TIDs >> would be acceptable? > > Would we be able to access those __rseq_abi as normal TLS IE model > variables ? The overhead of indexing an array matters for a > fast-path. No, that wouldn't be possible in this case. You would need another indirection. Thanks, Florian