From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 388B9900194 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:03:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01relay03.pok.ibm.com (d01relay03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.235]) by e5.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p5MEZ7NZ009965 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 10:35:07 -0400 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d01relay03.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p5MF3AdO103322 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:03:11 -0400 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p5M933Nv010900 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 03:03:06 -0600 Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:24:24 +0530 From: Srikar Dronamraju Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3.0-rc2-tip 14/22] 14: x86: uprobes exception notifier for x86. Message-ID: <20110622145424.GG16471@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: Srikar Dronamraju References: <20110607125804.28590.92092.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6> <20110607130101.28590.99984.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6> <1308663084.26237.145.camel@twins> <1308663167.26237.146.camel@twins> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1308663167.26237.146.camel@twins> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , Linux-mm , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Linus Torvalds , Masami Hiramatsu , Hugh Dickins , Christoph Hellwig , Andi Kleen , Thomas Gleixner , Jonathan Corbet , Oleg Nesterov , Andrew Morton , Jim Keniston , Roland McGrath , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , LKML * Peter Zijlstra [2011-06-21 15:32:47]: > On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:31 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 18:31 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > > @@ -844,6 +845,19 @@ do_notify_resume(struct pt_regs *regs, void *unused, __u32 thread_info_flags) > > > if (thread_info_flags & _TIF_SIGPENDING) > > > do_signal(regs); > > > > > > + if (thread_info_flags & _TIF_UPROBE) { > > > + clear_thread_flag(TIF_UPROBE); > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 > > > + /* > > > + * On x86_32, do_notify_resume() gets called with > > > + * interrupts disabled. Hence enable interrupts if they > > > + * are still disabled. > > > + */ > > > + local_irq_enable(); > > > +#endif > > > + uprobe_notify_resume(regs); > > > + } > > > > Would it make sense to do TIF_UPROBE before TIF_SIGPENDING? That way > > when uprobe decides it ought to have send a signal we don't have to do > > another loop through all this. > Okay, > > Also, it might be good to unify x86_86 and i386 on the interrupt thing, > instead of propagating this difference (unless of course there's a good > reason they're different, but I really don't know this code well). I am not sure if this has changed lately. So I will try removing the local_irq_enable. Oleg, Roland, do you know why do_notify_resume() gets called with interrupts disabled on i386? -- Thanks and Regards Srikar -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org