* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL [not found] <54c02fa6-8c8a-667f-af99-e83a1f150586 () kernel ! dk> @ 2020-11-03 10:54 ` Sven Schnelle 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Sven Schnelle @ 2020-11-03 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List, Qian Cai Jens Axboe <axboe () kernel ! dk> writes: > On 11/2/20 9:59 AM, Qian Cai wrote: >> On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. >>>> >>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >> >> Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional patch >> from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole >> series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced >> compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit >> af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1] > > That's odd, it should build fine without that patch. How did it fail for you? > > Can you try and add this on top? Looks like I forgot the signal change for > s390, though that shouldn't really cause any issues. > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > index 9e900a8977bd..a68c3796a1bf 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs) > current->thread.system_call = > test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0; > > - if (get_signal(&ksig)) { > + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) && get_signal(&ksig)) { Shouldn't that be TIF_SIGPENDING? > /* Whee! Actually deliver the signal. */ > if (current->thread.system_call) { > regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call; ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20201101173153.GC9375@osiris>]
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL [not found] <20201101173153.GC9375@osiris> @ 2020-11-03 11:00 ` Sven Schnelle 2020-11-03 14:09 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Sven Schnelle @ 2020-11-03 11:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List Hi Jens, Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. >> >> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >> --- >> >> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting >> for details: >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/ >> >> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs, >> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm >> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the >> arch tree. Let me know. >> >> arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++ >> arch/s390/kernel/entry.S | 7 ++++++- >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >> #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control block */ >> #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */ >> #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */ >> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */ >> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */ >> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */ >> >> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >> #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */ >> >> #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) >> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >> #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING) >> #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED) >> #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE) >> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT >> STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE >> >> _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \ >> - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING) >> + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \ >> + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >> _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ >> _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) >> _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU) >> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call) >> #endif >> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART >> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart >> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >> + jo .Lsysc_sigpending >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >> jo .Lsysc_sigpending >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) >> #endif >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >> jo .Lio_sigpending >> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >> + jo .Lio_sigpending >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >> jo .Lio_notify_resume >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE > > (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below). > > Please merge the patch below into this one. With that: > > Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call) > #endif > TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART > jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL > - jo .Lsysc_sigpending > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING > + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > jo .Lsysc_sigpending We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means 'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one bit is set' > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > jo .Lsysc_notify_resume > @@ -858,9 +856,7 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING > jo .Lio_patch_pending > #endif > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING > - jo .Lio_sigpending > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL > + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) Same here. > jo .Lio_sigpending > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > jo .Lio_notify_resume PS: I didn't get the previous emails, so i replied to a raw download from marc.info. Not sure whether Threading will work out. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 2020-11-03 11:00 ` Sven Schnelle @ 2020-11-03 14:09 ` Jens Axboe 2020-11-03 15:03 ` Sven Schnelle 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-03 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sven Schnelle Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List On 11/3/20 4:00 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote: > Hi Jens, > > Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes: > >> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. >>> >>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >>> --- >>> >>> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting >>> for details: >>> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/ >>> >>> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs, >>> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm >>> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the >>> arch tree. Let me know. >>> >>> arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++ >>> arch/s390/kernel/entry.S | 7 ++++++- >>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644 >>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >>> #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control block */ >>> #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */ >>> #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */ >>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */ >>> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */ >>> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */ >>> >>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >>> #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */ >>> >>> #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) >>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >>> #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING) >>> #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED) >>> #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE) >>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644 >>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT >>> STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE >>> >>> _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \ >>> - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING) >>> + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \ >>> + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >>> _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ >>> _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) >>> _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU) >>> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call) >>> #endif >>> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART >>> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart >>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >>> + jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >>> jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >>> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) >>> #endif >>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >>> jo .Lio_sigpending >>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >>> + jo .Lio_sigpending >>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >>> jo .Lio_notify_resume >>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE >> >> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below). >> >> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that: >> >> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> >> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call) >> #endif >> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART >> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart >> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >> - jo .Lsysc_sigpending >> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >> jo .Lsysc_sigpending > > We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means > 'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one > bit is set' Ah thanks, good catch. And you also caught the braino in signal.c, here's the end result: commit 0eb7d372d5319970bd15f2dbc18264ea576214d4 Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Date: Fri Oct 9 15:34:12 2020 -0600 s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644 --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control block */ #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */ #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */ +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */ #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */ #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */ @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */ #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING) #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED) #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE) diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S index 86235919c2d1..19a89f292290 100644 --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \ - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING) + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \ + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU) @@ -463,8 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call) #endif TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING - jo .Lsysc_sigpending + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) + jnz .Lsysc_sigpending TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME jo .Lsysc_notify_resume TSTMSK __LC_CPU_FLAGS,(_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY|_CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY) @@ -855,8 +856,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING jo .Lio_patch_pending #endif - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING - jo .Lio_sigpending + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) + jnz .Lio_sigpending TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME jo .Lio_notify_resume TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c index 9e900a8977bd..b27b6c1f058d 100644 --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs) current->thread.system_call = test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0; - if (get_signal(&ksig)) { + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING) && get_signal(&ksig)) { /* Whee! Actually deliver the signal. */ if (current->thread.system_call) { regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call; -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 2020-11-03 14:09 ` Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-03 15:03 ` Sven Schnelle 2020-11-03 15:12 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Sven Schnelle @ 2020-11-03 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List Hi Jens, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes: > On 11/3/20 4:00 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote: >> Hi Jens, >> >> Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes: >> >>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. >>>> >>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting >>>> for details: >>>> >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/ >>>> >>>> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs, >>>> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm >>>> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the >>>> arch tree. Let me know. >>>> >>>> arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++ >>>> arch/s390/kernel/entry.S | 7 ++++++- >>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >>>> #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control block */ >>>> #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */ >>>> #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */ >>>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */ >>>> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */ >>>> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */ >>>> >>>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >>>> #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */ >>>> >>>> #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) >>>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >>>> #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING) >>>> #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED) >>>> #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE) >>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT >>>> STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE >>>> >>>> _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \ >>>> - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING) >>>> + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \ >>>> + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >>>> _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ >>>> _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) >>>> _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU) >>>> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call) >>>> #endif >>>> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART >>>> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart >>>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >>>> + jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >>>> jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >>>> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) >>>> #endif >>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >>>> jo .Lio_sigpending >>>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >>>> + jo .Lio_sigpending >>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >>>> jo .Lio_notify_resume >>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE >>> >>> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below). >>> >>> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that: >>> >>> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644 >>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call) >>> #endif >>> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART >>> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart >>> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >>> - jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >>> jo .Lsysc_sigpending >> >> We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means >> 'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one >> bit is set' > > Ah thanks, good catch. And you also caught the braino in signal.c, here's > the end result: > > > commit 0eb7d372d5319970bd15f2dbc18264ea576214d4 > Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> > Date: Fri Oct 9 15:34:12 2020 -0600 > > s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL > > Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. > > Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org > Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> > > diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h > index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h > @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); > #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control block */ > #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */ > #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */ > +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */ > #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */ > #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */ > > @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); > #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */ > > #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) > +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING) > #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED) > #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE) > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > index 86235919c2d1..19a89f292290 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT > STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE > > _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \ > - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING) > + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \ > + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ > _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) > _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU) > @@ -463,8 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call) > #endif > TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART > jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING > - jo .Lsysc_sigpending > + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > + jnz .Lsysc_sigpending > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > jo .Lsysc_notify_resume > TSTMSK __LC_CPU_FLAGS,(_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY|_CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY) > @@ -855,8 +856,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING > jo .Lio_patch_pending > #endif > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING > - jo .Lio_sigpending > + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > + jnz .Lio_sigpending > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > jo .Lio_notify_resume > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > index 9e900a8977bd..b27b6c1f058d 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs) > current->thread.system_call = > test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0; > > - if (get_signal(&ksig)) { > + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING) && get_signal(&ksig)) { > /* Whee! Actually deliver the signal. */ > if (current->thread.system_call) { > regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call; Looks good, feel free to add my Acked-by. Thanks Sven ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 2020-11-03 15:03 ` Sven Schnelle @ 2020-11-03 15:12 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-03 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sven Schnelle Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List On 11/3/20 8:03 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote: > Hi Jens, > > Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes: > >> On 11/3/20 4:00 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote: >>> Hi Jens, >>> >>> Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes: >>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. >>>>> >>>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting >>>>> for details: >>>>> >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/ >>>>> >>>>> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs, >>>>> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm >>>>> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the >>>>> arch tree. Let me know. >>>>> >>>>> arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++ >>>>> arch/s390/kernel/entry.S | 7 ++++++- >>>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>>>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >>>>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >>>>> #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control block */ >>>>> #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */ >>>>> #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */ >>>>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */ >>>>> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */ >>>>> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */ >>>>> >>>>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >>>>> #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */ >>>>> >>>>> #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) >>>>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >>>>> #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING) >>>>> #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED) >>>>> #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE) >>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>>> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT >>>>> STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE >>>>> >>>>> _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \ >>>>> - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING) >>>>> + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \ >>>>> + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >>>>> _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ >>>>> _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) >>>>> _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU) >>>>> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call) >>>>> #endif >>>>> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART >>>>> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart >>>>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >>>>> + jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >>>>> jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >>>>> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) >>>>> #endif >>>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >>>>> jo .Lio_sigpending >>>>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >>>>> + jo .Lio_sigpending >>>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >>>>> jo .Lio_notify_resume >>>>> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE >>>> >>>> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below). >>>> >>>> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that: >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >>>> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call) >>>> #endif >>>> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART >>>> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart >>>> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >>>> - jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>>> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >>>> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >>>> jo .Lsysc_sigpending >>> >>> We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means >>> 'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one >>> bit is set' >> >> Ah thanks, good catch. And you also caught the braino in signal.c, here's >> the end result: >> >> >> commit 0eb7d372d5319970bd15f2dbc18264ea576214d4 >> Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >> Date: Fri Oct 9 15:34:12 2020 -0600 >> >> s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL >> >> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. >> >> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> >> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h >> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >> #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control block */ >> #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */ >> #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */ >> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */ >> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */ >> #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */ >> >> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); >> #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */ >> >> #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) >> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >> #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING) >> #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED) >> #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE) >> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> index 86235919c2d1..19a89f292290 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S >> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT >> STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE >> >> _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \ >> - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING) >> + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \ >> + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >> _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ >> _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) >> _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU) >> @@ -463,8 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call) >> #endif >> TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART >> jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart >> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >> - jo .Lsysc_sigpending >> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >> + jnz .Lsysc_sigpending >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >> jo .Lsysc_notify_resume >> TSTMSK __LC_CPU_FLAGS,(_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY|_CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY) >> @@ -855,8 +856,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING >> jo .Lio_patch_pending >> #endif >> - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING >> - jo .Lio_sigpending >> + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) >> + jnz .Lio_sigpending >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME >> jo .Lio_notify_resume >> TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE >> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c >> index 9e900a8977bd..b27b6c1f058d 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c >> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c >> @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs) >> current->thread.system_call = >> test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0; >> >> - if (get_signal(&ksig)) { >> + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING) && get_signal(&ksig)) { >> /* Whee! Actually deliver the signal. */ >> if (current->thread.system_call) { >> regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call; > > Looks good, feel free to add my Acked-by. Thanks for your help! Added. -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20201101173153.GC9375 () osiris>]
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL [not found] <20201101173153.GC9375 () osiris> @ 2020-11-02 16:59 ` Qian Cai 2020-11-02 17:04 ` Heiko Carstens 2020-11-02 17:07 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Qian Cai @ 2020-11-02 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. > > > > Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional patch from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1] .config: https://cailca.coding.net/public/linux/mm/git/files/master/s390.config 01: [ 3.284902] systemd[1]: systemd 239 (239-40.el8) running in system mode. 01: (+PAM +AUDIT +SELINUX +IMA -APPARMOR +SMACK +SYSVINIT +UTMP +LIBCRYPTSETUP + 01: GCRYPT +GNUTLS +ACL +XZ +LZ4 +SECCOMP +BLKID +ELFUTILS +KMOD +IDN2 -IDN +PCR 01: E2 default-hierarchy=legacy) 01: [ 3.285558] systemd[1]: Detected virtualization zvm. 01: [ 3.285585] systemd[1]: Detected architecture s390x. 01: [ 3.285618] systemd[1]: Running in initial RAM disk. 01: [ 3.376459] systemd[1]: Set hostname to <ibm-z-137.rhts.eng.bos.redhat.co 01: m>. 01: [ 3.464950] mkdir (45) used greatest stack depth: 57824 bytes left 01: 01: Welcome to [0;34mRed Hat Enterprise Linux 8.3 (Ootpa) dracut-049-95.git20200 01: 804.el8 (Initramfs)[0m! 01: 00: [ 87.908107] random: crng init done 01: [ 490.492263] INFO: task (sd-executor):42 can't die for more than 368 secon 01: ds. 01: [ 490.492303] task:(sd-executor) state:R running task stack:58984 pi 01: d: 42 ppid: 1 flags:0x00000002 01: [ 490.492359] Call Trace: 01: [ 490.492382] [<00000000163f0652>] __schedule+0xa12/0x1840 01: [ 490.492391] [<00000000163f1562>] schedule+0xe2/0x310 (inlined by) __preempt_count_add at arch/s390/include/asm/preempt.h:56 (discriminator 1) (inlined by) __preempt_count_sub at arch/s390/include/asm/preempt.h:63 (discriminator 1) (inlined by) schedule at kernel/sched/core.c:4602 (discriminator 1) 01: [ 490.492399] [<000000001640390a>] system_call+0xe2/0x278 system_call at arch/s390/kernel/entry.S:424 01: [ 490.492407] no locks held by (sd-executor)/42. 01: [ 490.492420] 01: [ 490.492420] Showing all locks held in the system: 01: [ 490.492438] 1 lock held by khungtaskd/25: 01: [ 490.492445] #0: 0000000016b92c80 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rcu_lo 01: ck_acquire.constprop.54+0x0/0x50 01: [ 490.492481] 01: [ 490.492488] ============================================= 01: [ 490.492488] [1]: 7b074c15374c io_uring: remove 'twa_signal_ok' deadlock work-around eb48a0f216fa kernel: remove checking for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL c634e6b63a81 signal: kill JOBCTL_TASK_WORK f8b667db31a3 io_uring: JOBCTL_TASK_WORK is no longer used by task_work c50eb9d59bb1 task_work: remove legacy TWA_SIGNAL path 1d48c8d6d71e xtensa: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 8ef9c750c5a1 um: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 3f242a158b7c sparc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 40c7ac5c4790 sh: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 5e59963ed1ac riscv: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 9333d15595e8 openrisc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL c34f87ae2e81 nds32: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 27af2ca0cdda microblaze: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL ef1863c4081e ia64: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 58d670021acc hexagon: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 1facd6bf079c h8300: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 1b81145fc28d csky: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL bbc8d03c0bf3 c6x: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 6cbc413682ac arm: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL e9822185daa1 alpha: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 4c3d9c3b415a s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL d0772a4d9367 mips: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 07246df9ebe4 powerpc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 9edbc08ce909 parisc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL c96152dd9c01 nios32: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 89d22e3adff3 m68k: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 3db7550a998c arm64: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 9161d936d1ff arc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL fdb5f027ce66 task_work: use TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL if available 323b0fba756d x86: wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL a1a5bc3e8659 kernel: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL c0947f6b6ed2 kernel: add task_sigpending() helper > > --- > > > > 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting > > for details: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/ > > > > As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs, > > as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm > > happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the > > arch tree. Let me know. > > > > arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++ > > arch/s390/kernel/entry.S | 7 ++++++- > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h > > b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h > > index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644 > > --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h > > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h > > @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); > > #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE 4 /* load guarded storage control > > block */ > > #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING 5 /* pending live patching update */ > > #define TIF_PGSTE 6 /* New mm's will use 4K page tables */ > > +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 7 /* signal notifications exist */ > > #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP 8 /* Run process with isolated BP */ > > #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST 9 /* Run KVM guests with isolated BP > > */ > > > > @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void); > > #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 27 /* syscall tracepoint > > instrumentation */ > > > > #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) > > +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > > #define _TIF_SIGPENDING BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING) > > #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED) > > #define _TIF_UPROBE BIT(TIF_UPROBE) > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > > index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644 > > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > > @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE = 1 << STACK_SHIFT > > STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE > > > > _TIF_WORK = (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \ > > - _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING) > > + _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \ > > + _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > > _TIF_TRACE = (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ > > _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) > > _CIF_WORK = (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU) > > @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call) > > #endif > > TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART > > jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart > > + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL > > + jo .Lsysc_sigpending > > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING > > jo .Lsysc_sigpending > > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > > @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) > > #endif > > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING > > jo .Lio_sigpending > > + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL > > + jo .Lio_sigpending > > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > > jo .Lio_notify_resume > > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE > > (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below). > > Please merge the patch below into this one. With that: > > Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S > @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call) > #endif > TSTMSK __PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART > jo .Lsysc_syscall_restart > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL > - jo .Lsysc_sigpending > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING > + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > jo .Lsysc_sigpending > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > jo .Lsysc_notify_resume > @@ -858,9 +856,7 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler) > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING > jo .Lio_patch_pending > #endif > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING > - jo .Lio_sigpending > - TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL > + TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) > jo .Lio_sigpending > TSTMSK __TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME > jo .Lio_notify_resum ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 2020-11-02 16:59 ` Qian Cai @ 2020-11-02 17:04 ` Heiko Carstens 2020-11-02 17:07 ` Jens Axboe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Heiko Carstens @ 2020-11-02 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qian Cai Cc: Jens Axboe, linux-s390, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 11:59:41AM -0500, Qian Cai wrote: > On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. > > > > > > Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org > > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> > > Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional patch > from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole > series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced > compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit > af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1] > > .config: https://cailca.coding.net/public/linux/mm/git/files/master/s390.config I'll take a look at it, but probably not today anymore. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 2020-11-02 16:59 ` Qian Cai 2020-11-02 17:04 ` Heiko Carstens @ 2020-11-02 17:07 ` Jens Axboe 2020-11-02 18:58 ` Qian Cai 1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-02 17:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qian Cai Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List On 11/2/20 9:59 AM, Qian Cai wrote: > On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. >>> >>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> > > Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional patch > from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole > series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced > compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit > af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1] That's odd, it should build fine without that patch. How did it fail for you? Can you try and add this on top? Looks like I forgot the signal change for s390, though that shouldn't really cause any issues. diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c index 9e900a8977bd..a68c3796a1bf 100644 --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs) current->thread.system_call = test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0; - if (get_signal(&ksig)) { + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) && get_signal(&ksig)) { /* Whee! Actually deliver the signal. */ if (current->thread.system_call) { regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call; -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 2020-11-02 17:07 ` Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-02 18:58 ` Qian Cai 2020-11-02 19:50 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Qian Cai @ 2020-11-02 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 10:07 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 11/2/20 9:59 AM, Qian Cai wrote: > > On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. > > > > > > > > Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org > > > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> > > > > Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional > > patch > > from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole > > series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced > > compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit > > af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1] > > That's odd, it should build fine without that patch. How did it fail for you? In file included from ./arch/s390/include/asm/bug.h:5, from ./include/linux/bug.h:5, from ./include/linux/mmdebug.h:5, from ./include/linux/percpu.h:5, from ./include/linux/context_tracking_state.h:5, from ./include/linux/hardirq.h:5, from ./include/linux/kvm_host.h:7, from arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c:11: ./include/linux/sched/signal.h: In function ‘signal_pending’: ./include/linux/sched/signal.h:368:39: error: ‘TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME’? if (unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL))) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ./include/linux/compiler.h:78:42: note: in definition of macro ‘unlikely’ # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0) ^ ./include/linux/sched/signal.h:368:39: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in if (unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL))) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ./include/linux/compiler.h:78:42: note: in definition of macro ‘unlikely’ # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0) ^ make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:117: arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error 1 make: *** [Makefile:1198: prepare0] Error 2 > > Can you try and add this on top? Looks like I forgot the signal change for > s390, though that shouldn't really cause any issues. It does not help with the boot issue at all. > > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > index 9e900a8977bd..a68c3796a1bf 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c > @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs) > current->thread.system_call = > test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0; > > - if (get_signal(&ksig)) { > + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) && get_signal(&ksig)) { > /* Whee! Actually deliver the signal. */ > if (current->thread.system_call) { > regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call; > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 2020-11-02 18:58 ` Qian Cai @ 2020-11-02 19:50 ` Jens Axboe 2020-11-02 21:15 ` Qian Cai 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-02 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qian Cai Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List On 11/2/20 11:58 AM, Qian Cai wrote: > On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 10:07 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 11/2/20 9:59 AM, Qian Cai wrote: >>> On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390. >>>>> >>>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> >>> >>> Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional >>> patch >>> from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole >>> series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced >>> compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit >>> af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1] >> >> That's odd, it should build fine without that patch. How did it fail for you? > > In file included from ./arch/s390/include/asm/bug.h:5, > from ./include/linux/bug.h:5, > from ./include/linux/mmdebug.h:5, > from ./include/linux/percpu.h:5, > from ./include/linux/context_tracking_state.h:5, > from ./include/linux/hardirq.h:5, > from ./include/linux/kvm_host.h:7, > from arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c:11: > ./include/linux/sched/signal.h: In function ‘signal_pending’: > ./include/linux/sched/signal.h:368:39: error: ‘TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL’ undeclared > (first use in this function); did you mean ‘TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME’? > if (unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL))) > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/linux/compiler.h:78:42: note: in definition of macro ‘unlikely’ > # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0) > ^ > ./include/linux/sched/signal.h:368:39: note: each undeclared identifier is > reported only once for each function it appears in > if (unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL))) > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/linux/compiler.h:78:42: note: in definition of macro ‘unlikely’ > # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0) > ^ > make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:117: arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error > 1 > make: *** [Makefile:1198: prepare0] Error 2 Ah, but that's because later patches assume that TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL is always there once all archs have been converted. If you just want to back out that patch, you'll need to just revert this one: commit 82ef6998ed9d488e56bbfbcc2ec9adf62bf78f08 Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Date: Fri Oct 9 16:04:39 2020 -0600 kernel: remove checking for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL as well and I suspect it should build. -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL 2020-11-02 19:50 ` Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-02 21:15 ` Qian Cai 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Qian Cai @ 2020-11-02 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx, Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 12:50 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > Ah, but that's because later patches assume that TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL is > always there once all archs have been converted. If you just want to back > out that patch, you'll need to just revert this one: > > commit 82ef6998ed9d488e56bbfbcc2ec9adf62bf78f08 > Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> > Date: Fri Oct 9 16:04:39 2020 -0600 > > kernel: remove checking for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL > > as well and I suspect it should build. No, at the minimal, I'll need to revert those to build successfully. 7b074c15374c io_uring: remove 'twa_signal_ok' deadlock work-around eb48a0f216fa kernel: remove checking for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL c634e6b63a81 signal: kill JOBCTL_TASK_WORK f8b667db31a3 io_uring: JOBCTL_TASK_WORK is no longer used by task_work 4c3d9c3b415a s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL Then, it will fix the boot issue as well. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-11-03 15:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <54c02fa6-8c8a-667f-af99-e83a1f150586 () kernel ! dk>
2020-11-03 10:54 ` [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL Sven Schnelle
[not found] <20201101173153.GC9375@osiris>
2020-11-03 11:00 ` Sven Schnelle
2020-11-03 14:09 ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-03 15:03 ` Sven Schnelle
2020-11-03 15:12 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] <20201101173153.GC9375 () osiris>
2020-11-02 16:59 ` Qian Cai
2020-11-02 17:04 ` Heiko Carstens
2020-11-02 17:07 ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-02 18:58 ` Qian Cai
2020-11-02 19:50 ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-02 21:15 ` Qian Cai
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).