From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
paulmck <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Neel Natu <neelnatu@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for 5.5 1/2] rseq: Fix: Clarify rseq.h UAPI rseq_cs memory reclaim requirements
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 20:30:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a7709ydd.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1025393027.850.1578337717165.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (Mathieu Desnoyers's message of "Mon, 6 Jan 2020 14:08:37 -0500 (EST)")
* Mathieu Desnoyers:
> Just to clarify: should the discussion here prevent the UAPI
> documentation change from being merged into the Linux kernel ? Our
> discussion seems to be related to integration of rseq into glibc,
> rather than the kernel UAPI per se.
I still think that clearing rseq_cs upon exit from the function that
contains the sequence is good practice, and the UAPI header should
mention that.
For glibc, if I recall correctly, we decided against doing anything in
dlclose to deal with this issue (remapping new code in an existing
rseq area) because it would need updating all threads, not just the
thread calling dlclose. That's why we're punting this to
applications and why I think the UAPI header should mention this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-06 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-20 20:12 [PATCH for 5.5 1/2] rseq: Fix: Clarify rseq.h UAPI rseq_cs memory reclaim requirements Mathieu Desnoyers
2019-12-20 20:12 ` [PATCH for 5.5 2/2] rseq/selftests: Clarify rseq_prepare_unload() helper requirements Mathieu Desnoyers
2019-12-20 20:27 ` Shuah Khan
2019-12-20 20:32 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2019-12-20 20:37 ` [PATCH for 5.5 1/2] rseq: Fix: Clarify rseq.h UAPI rseq_cs memory reclaim requirements Florian Weimer
2019-12-20 20:54 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2019-12-20 20:57 ` Florian Weimer
2019-12-20 21:15 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-01-06 19:08 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-01-06 19:30 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2020-01-06 20:25 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=87a7709ydd.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de \
--to=fw@deneb.enyo.de \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=neelnatu@google.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--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).