From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/76] ARC: Low level IRQ/Trap/Exception Handling Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 03:31:04 +0000 Message-ID: <20130119033104.GD23552@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <1358511930-7424-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <1358511930-7424-14-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1358511930-7424-14-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Vineet Gupta Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 05:54:27PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote: > + ; --- (Slow Path #3) notify_resume --- > +.Lchk_notify_resume: > + btst r9, TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > + blnz @do_notify_resume > + b resume_user_mode_begin ; unconditionally back to U mode ret chks > + ; for single exit point from this block Umm... Can we even get there without NOTIFY_RESUME? Again, there's future-proofing and there's laying minefields - think what will happen if we *do* get there with some bit in _TIF_WORK_MASK that isn't recognized by any of these cases. Looping forever? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:47135 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751070Ab3ASDbF (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jan 2013 22:31:05 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 03:31:04 +0000 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/76] ARC: Low level IRQ/Trap/Exception Handling Message-ID: <20130119033104.GD23552@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <1358511930-7424-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <1358511930-7424-14-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1358511930-7424-14-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Vineet Gupta Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de Message-ID: <20130119033104.xmMSzmd7VQW-5VyZW6OrWJNYR7UMr2BXMfGAKJ83s4E@z> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 05:54:27PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote: > + ; --- (Slow Path #3) notify_resume --- > +.Lchk_notify_resume: > + btst r9, TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > + blnz @do_notify_resume > + b resume_user_mode_begin ; unconditionally back to U mode ret chks > + ; for single exit point from this block Umm... Can we even get there without NOTIFY_RESUME? Again, there's future-proofing and there's laying minefields - think what will happen if we *do* get there with some bit in _TIF_WORK_MASK that isn't recognized by any of these cases. Looping forever?