From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4370CC47420 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:27:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C610D20848 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:27:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="NYWL3ujd" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732670AbgJAQ13 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2020 12:27:29 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:39478 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732026AbgJAQ13 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2020 12:27:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1601569648; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=WpyfW6uB/uLX11MkTOm4JRQtX6e9GzHMT50ADwTIIHk=; b=NYWL3ujdIOROWaip1KgAdRCMNP29E3ylff2ddZF3o7PGcbp9PRS/YRyFfsLb+80TTcz/t0 Li/AexIcUWPP6EsmY7gb1cDRModpuEwz99qUK4QBzgdMaYfvigjoFXrnmxkzCOXUOf88V3 uU/CS3Y5pRbEBG82+vAUWUfmYO7REV4= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-467-m49T-GglN5m-W8mAaGTrZA-1; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 12:27:24 -0400 X-MC-Unique: m49T-GglN5m-W8mAaGTrZA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 320951DE0E; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:27:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.40.192.152]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B56BD60BF1; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:27:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1000 oleg@redhat.com; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 18:27:22 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 18:27:20 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Jens Axboe Cc: io-uring , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2] kernel: decouple TASK_WORK TWA_SIGNAL handling from signals Message-ID: <20201001162719.GD13633@redhat.com> References: <3ce9e205-aad0-c9ce-86a7-b281f1c0237a@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3ce9e205-aad0-c9ce-86a7-b281f1c0237a@kernel.dk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jens, I'll read this version tomorrow, but: On 10/01, Jens Axboe wrote: > > static inline int signal_pending(struct task_struct *p) > { > - return unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p,TIF_SIGPENDING)); > +#ifdef TIF_TASKWORK > + /* > + * TIF_TASKWORK isn't really a signal, but it requires the same > + * behavior of restarting the system call to force a kernel/user > + * transition. > + */ > + return unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_SIGPENDING) || > + test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_TASKWORK)); > +#else > + return unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_SIGPENDING)); > +#endif This change alone is already very wrong. signal_pending(task) == T means that this task will do get_signal() as soon as it can, and this basically means you can't "divorce" SIGPENDING and TASKWORK. Simple example. Suppose we have a single-threaded task T. Someone does task_work_add(T, TWA_SIGNAL). This makes signal_pending()==T and this is what we need. Now suppose that another task sends a signal to T before T calls task_work_run() and clears TIF_TASKWORK. In this case SIGPENDING won't be set because signal_pending() is already set (see wants_signal), and this means that T won't notice this signal. Oleg.