From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8D51189B9D; Sat, 26 Apr 2025 18:51:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745693483; cv=none; b=EhkH3uQKZ3a/ADaKYcslf6xwNiGor4Zg/GvDHdBW9Jiu41EMR3G2S1o/2PEXP26T6xe95vHPpjYP6LV1Cf58xnvI6PIn0iIpH6VfAsVGPpGy0qQx3KUqh2jZ7wfPADzad6lbAB/WmlTJJOD3Dx1YuEF8ldazWyiv3gf37z/PnqQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745693483; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Dv0b8I6fjHkXn4VX9Jd5ArqB4oJnp0uQFx77VzaE82w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=SIeq4lJFB1faGrERFulDRNjGGKj8RghV1iIFXLu8a/jbyCFAR/gnJWmlLymffIwBicr+3PxcW2PrGqIYzuDB5GB+LuyksHskt/qeh5z2okVLp2b7bPOoi7wkYluyI0ZD3pizFA66ziMeSIDqtoinXsQIpdldH9kEDy0JqZ24SdI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DxAh0UnN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="DxAh0UnN" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E1E6C4CEE8; Sat, 26 Apr 2025 18:51:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1745693482; bh=Dv0b8I6fjHkXn4VX9Jd5ArqB4oJnp0uQFx77VzaE82w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DxAh0UnNcv/tJObKhUcAwOl3nhozM2Cu//MOPVFG1osUL8EqAJayVU5kV33F/nprB bTQRdaYd2aMRpViOHn7md3Dh/1sRoC3YcDn14AYKvEn6YGONarCt5roHQIUrLxiZ9l SniLdxUhIr6qhFlRdKUYERirUzIhLzuBQ50ToUCx01+yei3FFdvmxthcpF6+QziAFH GXxD72Z7EgvIucLnD09ydwPtForub2gH/sl1Bdm1+EdeQDPsQ8bXcn4ZZpwvGR6fO3 Nkuh7rY0G9lrJHiyGl5NixRrC3PXsgd0jy3P9xGa6XlKvHAZKg0kBxttWn5y0WsJG9 JMMhgkAM5Ej5A== Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2025 20:51:15 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Masami Hiramatsu , Mark Rutland , Mathieu Desnoyers , Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , x86@kernel.org, Kees Cook , bpf@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo , Julia Lawall , Nicolas Palix , cocci@inria.fr, "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/core: Introduce task_*() helpers for PF_ flags Message-ID: References: <20250425204120.639530125@goodmis.org> <20250425161449.7a2516b3fe0d5de3e2d2b677@linux-foundation.org> <20250426084320.335d4cb2@batman.local.home> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: * Ingo Molnar wrote: > - We might want to add set_task_*() helpers as well, to totally > encapsulate PF_ uses. Maybe. I dislike how close it is to the > existing set_tsk*() methods that manipulate TIF_ flags. The > dichotomy between the TIF_ and PF_ space isn't really sensible these > days I think on a conceptual level - although merging them is > probably not practical due to possibly running out of easy 64-bit > word width. And yeah, the TIF_ space is per arch to a substantial degree, and is accessed from assembly code, plus is often operated on atomically, while the PF_ space is nicely generic and non-atomic - but still we could do better to express that these two per task flag spaces are rather similar in purpose, instead of this historic 'task/process' distinction that isn't actually true. Thanks, Ingo