From: Tiwei Bie <tiwei.bie@linux.dev>
To: johannes@sipsolutions.net
Cc: richard@nod.at, anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com,
linux-um@lists.infradead.org, tiwei.bie@linux.dev,
tiwei.btw@antgroup.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] um: Stop tracking stub's PID via userspace_pid[]
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 20:28:19 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250711122819.2727024-1-tiwei.bie@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7dec916560a07a6d9d3f8e37bae482738d2c360c.camel@sipsolutions.net>
On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 09:03:26 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-07-11 at 14:50 +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> > From: Tiwei Bie <tiwei.btw@antgroup.com>
> >
> > The PID of the stub process can be obtained from current_mm_id().
> > There is no need to track it via userspace_pid[]. Stop doing that
> > to simplify the code.
>
> So that is really obvious cleanups, and I can go apply them on that
> grounds, but I started wondering if we're not separately being
> inconsistent here, which perhaps didn't matter due to non-SMP:
>
> > #define activate_mm activate_mm
> > static inline void activate_mm(struct mm_struct *old, struct mm_struct *new)
> > {
> > - /*
> > - * This is called by fs/exec.c and sys_unshare()
> > - * when the new ->mm is used for the first time.
> > - */
> > - __switch_mm(&new->context.id);
> > }
>
> This is now empty, so I wondered if we can just remove it _entirely_.
>
> But the generic version calls switch_mm():
Yeah, removing activate_mm() will cause it to call switch_mm(). This is
somewhat a behavior change beyond the scope of this patchset, so I kept
it as is.
>
> > static inline void switch_mm(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
> > @@ -28,11 +23,9 @@ static inline void switch_mm(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
> > {
> > unsigned cpu = smp_processor_id();
> >
> > - if(prev != next){
> > + if (prev != next) {
> > cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(prev));
> > cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(next));
> > - if(next != &init_mm)
> > - __switch_mm(&next->context.id);
> > }
> > }
>
> which plays with the CPU mask, but realistically being non-SMP the CPU
> mask is never really used?
>
> Certainly removing activate_mm() entirely seems to _work_, but of course
> it never does anything since smp_processor_id() eventually is just
> macros that expand to "0" (unless preempt debug is enabled). Any
> thoughts?
Yeah, things are a bit messy here and need to be sorted out.
IIUC, activate_mm() and switch_mm() are primarily used to update the
page table and manage the TLBs on the CPU for each user address space.
However, in UML, each user address space is represented by a separate
stub process, and the host kernel already takes care of that. So, I'm
not entirely sure why we need to maintain the mm_cpumask. Perhaps we
could just do this:
--- a/arch/um/include/asm/mmu_context.h
+++ b/arch/um/include/asm/mmu_context.h
@@ -13,20 +13,9 @@
#include <asm/mm_hooks.h>
#include <asm/mmu.h>
-#define activate_mm activate_mm
-static inline void activate_mm(struct mm_struct *old, struct mm_struct *new)
-{
-}
-
static inline void switch_mm(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
struct task_struct *tsk)
{
- unsigned cpu = smp_processor_id();
-
- if (prev != next) {
- cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(prev));
- cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(next));
- }
}
#define init_new_context init_new_context
Regards,
Tiwei
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-11 12:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-11 6:50 [PATCH v2 0/3] um: Remove userspace_pid[] Tiwei Bie
2025-07-11 6:50 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] um: Use err consistently in userspace() Tiwei Bie
2025-07-11 6:50 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] um: Remove the pid parameter of handle_trap() Tiwei Bie
2025-07-11 6:50 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] um: Stop tracking stub's PID via userspace_pid[] Tiwei Bie
2025-07-11 7:03 ` Johannes Berg
2025-07-11 12:28 ` Tiwei Bie [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=20250711122819.2727024-1-tiwei.bie@linux.dev \
--to=tiwei.bie@linux.dev \
--cc=anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=tiwei.btw@antgroup.com \
/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 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).