From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>, Martin Fuzzey <mfuzzey@parkeon.com>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>, Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>, jewalt@lgsinnovations.com, Rafa?? Mi??ecki <rafal@milecki.pl>, Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, "Li, Yi" <yi1.li@linux.intel.com>, atull@kernel.org, Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@ettus.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>, Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>, "Coelho, Luciano" <luciano.coelho@intel.com>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, "AKASHI, Takahiro" <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>, Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>, Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>, Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "stable # 4 . 6" <stable@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] swait: add the missing killable swaits Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:27:35 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20170707222735.GC30414@linux-80c1.suse> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwR9OTt9fuAj2dW_S2muphhH4akVzSASS7Bn2QRb3brog@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, 07 Jul 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote: >On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> wrote: >> >> So here's something that boots and builds a kernel. Any thoughts? > >This patch ios just nasty crap. Sorry. > >It has random whitespace changfes that look entirely unrelated to trhe >actual real meat of the patch, and that actually make whitespace >*worse*. Ok sorry, fwiw those were 80-line fixlets I thought were trivial enough to just fly by. > >WHY? > >That alone should just mean that this patch needs to be thrown away >and never ever looked at again. > >But also, this is fundamentally garbage. > >Exactly for the same reasons that the swait interfaces were >fundamentally broken. > >It *looks* like it works on regular wait queues, and people can start >using it that way, but it actually doesn't have the right semantics at >all. > >The new "lockless" function ONLY works if you don't have a private >wakeup function. Oh indeed, this was always my intent. Going back to the patch, when checking DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC I clearly overlooked the ->func() implications, breaking all kinds of semantics. With that and the constraints aforementioned in the patch, I see no sane way of using wake_qs. > >So no, this is not only NAK'ed, the whole approach is pure and utter >shit and this needs to be buried deep and forgotten about so that it >never ever comes back to life. Given that you seem to agree that the lockless version is possible as long as we keep semantics, this imho is another point for some form of simplified waitqueues. But yeah. Thanks, Davidlohr
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>, Martin Fuzzey <mfuzzey@parkeon.com>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>, Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>, jewalt@lgsinnovations.com, Rafa?? Mi??ecki <rafal@milecki.pl>, Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, "Li, Yi" <yi1.li@linux.intel.com>, atull@kernel.org, Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@ettus.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>, Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>, "Coelho, Luciano" <luciano.coelho@intel.com>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] swait: add the missing killable swaits Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:27:35 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20170707222735.GC30414@linux-80c1.suse> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwR9OTt9fuAj2dW_S2muphhH4akVzSASS7Bn2QRb3brog@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, 07 Jul 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote: >On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> wrote: >> >> So here's something that boots and builds a kernel. Any thoughts? > >This patch ios just nasty crap. Sorry. > >It has random whitespace changfes that look entirely unrelated to trhe >actual real meat of the patch, and that actually make whitespace >*worse*. Ok sorry, fwiw those were 80-line fixlets I thought were trivial enough to just fly by. > >WHY? > >That alone should just mean that this patch needs to be thrown away >and never ever looked at again. > >But also, this is fundamentally garbage. > >Exactly for the same reasons that the swait interfaces were >fundamentally broken. > >It *looks* like it works on regular wait queues, and people can start >using it that way, but it actually doesn't have the right semantics at >all. > >The new "lockless" function ONLY works if you don't have a private >wakeup function. Oh indeed, this was always my intent. Going back to the patch, when checking DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC I clearly overlooked the ->func() implications, breaking all kinds of semantics. With that and the constraints aforementioned in the patch, I see no sane way of using wake_qs. > >So no, this is not only NAK'ed, the whole approach is pure and utter >shit and this needs to be buried deep and forgotten about so that it >never ever comes back to life. Given that you seem to agree that the lockless version is possible as long as we keep semantics, this imho is another point for some form of simplified waitqueues. But yeah. Thanks, Davidlohr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-07 22:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2017-06-14 22:20 [PATCH 0/4] firmware: fix fallback mechanism by ignoring SIGCHLD Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-14 22:20 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-14 22:20 ` [PATCH 1/4] test_firmware: add test case for SIGCHLD on sync fallback Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-14 22:20 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-14 22:20 ` [PATCH 2/4] swait: add the missing killable swaits Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-14 22:20 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 12:54 ` Greg KH 2017-06-29 12:54 ` Greg KH 2017-06-29 13:05 ` Thomas Gleixner 2017-06-29 13:05 ` Thomas Gleixner 2017-06-29 13:35 ` Greg KH 2017-06-29 13:35 ` Greg KH 2017-06-29 13:46 ` Thomas Gleixner 2017-06-29 13:46 ` Thomas Gleixner 2017-06-29 16:13 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-29 16:13 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-29 16:31 ` Matthew Wilcox 2017-06-29 16:31 ` Matthew Wilcox 2017-06-29 17:29 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 17:29 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 17:40 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2017-06-29 17:40 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2017-06-29 17:57 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-29 17:57 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-29 18:33 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2017-06-29 18:33 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2017-06-29 18:59 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-29 18:59 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-29 19:40 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 19:40 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 19:44 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 19:44 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 20:58 ` Jakub Kicinski 2017-06-29 20:58 ` Jakub Kicinski 2017-06-29 22:50 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 22:50 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 22:53 ` Jakub Kicinski 2017-06-29 22:53 ` Jakub Kicinski 2017-06-29 23:00 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 23:00 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 23:06 ` Jakub Kicinski 2017-06-29 23:06 ` Jakub Kicinski 2017-07-12 21:33 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-07-12 21:33 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 20:57 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-29 20:57 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-07-05 2:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2017-07-05 2:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2017-07-07 19:58 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-07-07 19:58 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-07-07 22:27 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message] 2017-07-07 22:27 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2017-07-07 22:48 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-07-07 22:48 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-29 19:15 ` Marcelo Tosatti 2017-06-29 19:15 ` Marcelo Tosatti 2017-06-29 19:15 ` Marcelo Tosatti 2017-06-30 4:03 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-30 4:03 ` Linus Torvalds 2017-06-30 11:55 ` Marcelo Tosatti 2017-06-30 11:55 ` Marcelo Tosatti 2017-06-30 11:55 ` Marcelo Tosatti 2017-06-30 11:57 ` Marcelo Tosatti 2017-06-30 11:57 ` Marcelo Tosatti 2017-06-30 17:30 ` Krister Johansen 2017-06-30 17:30 ` Krister Johansen 2017-06-14 22:20 ` [PATCH 3/4] firmware: avoid invalid fallback aborts by using killable swait Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-14 22:20 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-14 22:20 ` [PATCH 4/4] firmware: send -EINTR on signal abort on fallback mechanism Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-14 22:20 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-15 7:49 ` [PATCH 0/4] firmware: fix fallback mechanism by ignoring SIGCHLD Martin Fuzzey 2017-06-26 21:19 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-26 21:19 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 15:14 ` Greg KH 2017-06-29 15:14 ` Greg KH 2017-06-29 17:29 ` Luis R. Rodriguez 2017-06-29 17:29 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
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=20170707222735.GC30414@linux-80c1.suse \ --to=dave@stgolabs.net \ --cc=alan@linux.intel.com \ --cc=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \ --cc=atull@kernel.org \ --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \ --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \ --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \ --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \ --cc=emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \ --cc=jewalt@lgsinnovations.com \ --cc=johannes.berg@intel.com \ --cc=keescook@chromium.org \ --cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \ --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=luciano.coelho@intel.com \ --cc=luto@kernel.org \ --cc=mawilcox@microsoft.com \ --cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \ --cc=mfuzzey@parkeon.com \ --cc=moritz.fischer@ettus.com \ --cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \ --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \ --cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \ --cc=pjones@redhat.com \ --cc=pmladek@suse.com \ --cc=rafal@milecki.pl \ --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \ --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=tytso@mit.edu \ --cc=wagi@monom.org \ --cc=yi1.li@linux.intel.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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.