linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] posix-timers: Support delivery of signals to the current thread
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 16:34:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACT4Y+YKy_4mBLYomr49+fTm31Y6Q_kXhJz8O-_RTjMe=B-6eg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230125151717.GB13746@redhat.com>

 On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 16:17, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/25, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Other than that I see nothing wrong in this patch, but I forgot everything
> > about posix timers many years ago ;)
>
> Stupid question. Am I right that in posix_timer_event()
>
>         same_thread_group(current, pid_task(timr->it_pid, PIDTYPE_PID))
>
> is always true?
>
> If yes, perhaps we can do a much simpler change which doesn't even affect API?
> See the trivial patch below.
>
> send_sigqueue(PIDTYPE_TGID) notify any thread in thread group, so this doesn't
> really change the semantics, just complete_signal() will likely choose "current"
> as a target for signal_wake_up() and iiuc this is what we want for balancing?
>
> Oleg.
>
>
> diff --git a/kernel/time/posix-timers.c b/kernel/time/posix-timers.c
> index 5dead89308b7..e38b53a0f814 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/posix-timers.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/posix-timers.c
> @@ -336,6 +336,7 @@ void posixtimer_rearm(struct kernel_siginfo *info)
>  int posix_timer_event(struct k_itimer *timr, int si_private)
>  {
>         enum pid_type type;
> +       struct pid *pid;
>         int ret;
>         /*
>          * FIXME: if ->sigq is queued we can race with
> @@ -350,8 +351,9 @@ int posix_timer_event(struct k_itimer *timr, int si_private)
>          */
>         timr->sigq->info.si_sys_private = si_private;
>
> -       type = !(timr->it_sigev_notify & SIGEV_THREAD_ID) ? PIDTYPE_TGID : PIDTYPE_PID;
> -       ret = send_sigqueue(timr->sigq, timr->it_pid, type);
> +       type = (timr->it_sigev_notify & SIGEV_THREAD_ID) ? PIDTYPE_PID : PIDTYPE_TGID;
> +       pid = (type == PIDTYPE_PID) ? timr->it_pid : task_pid(current);
> +       ret = send_sigqueue(timr->sigq, pid, type);
>         /* If we failed to send the signal the timer stops. */
>         return ret > 0;
>  }

Hi Oleg,

This is indeed much simpler!

Do I understand correctly that:
1. I would need to use SIGEV_SIGNAL (without SIGEV_THREAD_ID)
2. The signal is still queued into process shared_pending
3. If the current task has not blocked the signal (it shouldn't), then
it won't kick any other task
4. The current task will likely deliver the signal right on the timer
interrupt return to userspace
?

This changes the existing behavior (the "average bear" may be surprised :))
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc5/source/kernel/signal.c#L1007
But currnently it's also queued into shared_pending and any thread
could get the signal anyway. So I think this should be fine.

On the positive side: it should improve performance. Delivering to the
currently running task is better on all fronts (no kicking,
rescheduling, IPIs, better locality), right?

Let me test that it works for my use-case.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-25 15:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-16 17:18 [RFC PATCH] posix-timers: Support delivery of signals to the current thread Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-11 15:49 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-11 21:28   ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-01-12 11:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2] " Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-25 12:43   ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-01-25 15:17     ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-01-25 15:34       ` Dmitry Vyukov [this message]
2023-01-25 16:31         ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-01-25 16:45           ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-01-25 17:07           ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-01-26 10:58             ` Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-26 10:56           ` Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-26 10:51   ` [PATCH v3] posix-timers: Prefer " Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-26 14:46     ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-01-26 15:41     ` [PATCH v4] " Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-26 17:51       ` Marco Elver
2023-01-26 19:57         ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-01-27  6:58           ` Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-28 19:56             ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-01-28 20:15               ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-01-30  9:00               ` Dmitry Vyukov
2023-01-30 16:49                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-02-02  7:36             ` Dmitry Vyukov
2023-02-20 14:43       ` [PATCH v5] " Dmitry Vyukov
2023-02-22 15:19         ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-03-14  8:25           ` Dmitry Vyukov

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='CACT4Y+YKy_4mBLYomr49+fTm31Y6Q_kXhJz8O-_RTjMe=B-6eg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --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).