From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Stas Sergeev <stsp@list.ru>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hpe.com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hpe.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signals: Avoid unnecessary taking of sighand->siglock
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 11:32:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160923093241.GA13792@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1474568705-40114-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
On 09/22, Waiman Long wrote:
>
> This patch is currently only active for 64-bit architectures.
Why?
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -2485,6 +2485,16 @@ void __set_current_blocked(const sigset_t *newset)
> {
> struct task_struct *tsk = current;
>
> + /*
> + * In case the signal mask hasn't changed, we won't need to take
> + * the lock. As the current blocked mask can be modified by other
> + * CPUs,
No, nobody else should modify current->blocked.
Yes, we need to cleanup the usage of force_sig_info(), and probably remove
the "struct task_struct *t" argument.
> we need to do an atomic read without lock. In other words,
> + * this check will only be done on 64-bit systems.
> + */
> +#if _NSIG_WORDS == 1
> + if (READ_ONCE(tsk->blocked.sig[0]) == newset->sig[0])
> + return;
> +#endif
OK, agreed, but this should not depend on _NSIG_WORDS == 1 and
READ_ONCE() looks confusing. It seems you need to add the new helper
into include/linux/signal.h.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-23 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-22 18:25 [PATCH] signals: Avoid unnecessary taking of sighand->siglock Waiman Long
2016-09-23 9:32 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2016-09-26 21:21 ` Waiman Long
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=20160923093241.GA13792@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hpe.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=doug.hatch@hpe.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=scott.norton@hpe.com \
--cc=stsp@list.ru \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).