From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1756669AbdKNUvu convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:51:50 -0500
Received: from mail.efficios.com ([167.114.142.141]:57796 "EHLO
        mail.efficios.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752528AbdKNUvk (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:51:40 -0500
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:52:23 +0000 (UTC)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@google.com>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <574606484.15158.1510692743725.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
In-Reply-To: <CY4PR15MB168866BFDCFECF81B7EF4CF1CF280@CY4PR15MB1688.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20171114200414.2188-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <20171114200414.2188-2-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <CY4PR15MB168866BFDCFECF81B7EF4CF1CF280@CY4PR15MB1688.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v11 for 4.15 01/24] Restartable sequences system
 call
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
X-Originating-IP: [167.114.142.141]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.7.11_GA_1854 (ZimbraWebClient - FF52 (Linux)/8.7.11_GA_1854)
Thread-Topic: Restartable sequences system call
Thread-Index: AQHTXYPhmIqd6HY5PUe1T5SV8sIkp6MUVZrNj4p9WjA=
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

----- On Nov 14, 2017, at 3:39 PM, Ben Maurer bmaurer@fb.com wrote:

>>       int rseq(struct rseq * rseq, uint32_t rseq_len, int flags, uint32_t sig);
> 
> Really dumb question -- and one I'm sorry to bring up at the last minute. Should
> we consider making the syscall name something more generic "register_tls_abi"?
> I'm assuming that if we ever want to use a per-thread userspace/kernel ABI
> we'll want to use this field given the difficulty of getting adoption of
> registration, the need to involve glibc, etc. It seems like there could be
> future use cases of this TLS area that have nothing to do with rseq.

I proposed that approach back in 2016 ("tls abi" system call), and the feedback
I received back then is that it was preferred to have a dedicated "rseq" system
call than an "open ended" and generic "tls abi" system call.

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com