linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
       [not found] <20201101173153.GC9375@osiris>
@ 2020-11-03 11:00 ` Sven Schnelle
  2020-11-03 14:09   ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Sven Schnelle @ 2020-11-03 11:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

Hi Jens,

Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes:

> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>> 
>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>> ---
>> 
>> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting
>> for details:
>> 
>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/
>> 
>> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs,
>> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm
>> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the
>> arch tree. Let me know.
>> 
>>  arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++
>>  arch/s390/kernel/entry.S            | 7 ++++++-
>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>  #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE	4	/* load guarded storage control block */
>>  #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING	5	/* pending live patching update */
>>  #define TIF_PGSTE		6	/* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	7	/* signal notifications exist */
>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP		8	/* Run process with isolated BP */
>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST	9	/* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */
>>  
>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>  #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT	27	/* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>>  
>>  #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>  #define _TIF_SIGPENDING		BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
>>  #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED	BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
>>  #define _TIF_UPROBE		BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE  = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
>>  STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
>>  
>>  _TIF_WORK	= (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
>> -		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
>> +		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
>> +		   _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>  _TIF_TRACE	= (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
>>  		   _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
>>  _CIF_WORK	= (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
>> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>>  #endif
>>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>> +	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>>  #endif
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>  	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>> +	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>  	jo	.Lio_notify_resume
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
>
> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below).
>
> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that:
>
> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>  #endif
>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> -	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending

We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means
'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one
bit is set'

>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>  	jo	.Lsysc_notify_resume
> @@ -858,9 +856,7 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING
>  	jo	.Lio_patch_pending
>  #endif
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> -	jo	.Lio_sigpending
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)

Same here.

>  	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>  	jo	.Lio_notify_resume

PS: I didn't get the previous emails, so i replied to a raw download
from marc.info. Not sure whether Threading will work out.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
  2020-11-03 11:00 ` [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL Sven Schnelle
@ 2020-11-03 14:09   ` Jens Axboe
  2020-11-03 15:03     ` Sven Schnelle
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-03 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sven Schnelle
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

On 11/3/20 4:00 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes:
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>>>
>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting
>>> for details:
>>>
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/
>>>
>>> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs,
>>> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm
>>> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the
>>> arch tree. Let me know.
>>>
>>>  arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++
>>>  arch/s390/kernel/entry.S            | 7 ++++++-
>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>>  #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE	4	/* load guarded storage control block */
>>>  #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING	5	/* pending live patching update */
>>>  #define TIF_PGSTE		6	/* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
>>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	7	/* signal notifications exist */
>>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP		8	/* Run process with isolated BP */
>>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST	9	/* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */
>>>  
>>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>>  #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT	27	/* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>>>  
>>>  #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
>>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>>  #define _TIF_SIGPENDING		BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
>>>  #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED	BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
>>>  #define _TIF_UPROBE		BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE  = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
>>>  STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
>>>  
>>>  _TIF_WORK	= (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
>>> -		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
>>> +		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
>>> +		   _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>>  _TIF_TRACE	= (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
>>>  		   _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
>>>  _CIF_WORK	= (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
>>> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>>>  #endif
>>>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
>>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>> +	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>>>  #endif
>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>  	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>> +	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>>  	jo	.Lio_notify_resume
>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
>>
>> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below).
>>
>> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that:
>>
>> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>>  #endif
>>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
>> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>> -	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
> 
> We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means
> 'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one
> bit is set'

Ah thanks, good catch. And you also caught the braino in signal.c, here's
the end result:


commit 0eb7d372d5319970bd15f2dbc18264ea576214d4
Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Date:   Fri Oct 9 15:34:12 2020 -0600

    s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
    
    Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
    
    Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
    Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
    Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
@@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
 #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE	4	/* load guarded storage control block */
 #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING	5	/* pending live patching update */
 #define TIF_PGSTE		6	/* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
+#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	7	/* signal notifications exist */
 #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP		8	/* Run process with isolated BP */
 #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST	9	/* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */
 
@@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
 #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT	27	/* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
 
 #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
+#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
 #define _TIF_SIGPENDING		BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
 #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED	BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
 #define _TIF_UPROBE		BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
index 86235919c2d1..19a89f292290 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
@@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE  = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
 STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
 
 _TIF_WORK	= (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
-		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
+		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
+		   _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
 _TIF_TRACE	= (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
 		   _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
 _CIF_WORK	= (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
@@ -463,8 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
 #endif
 	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
 	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
-	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
-	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
+	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
+	jnz	.Lsysc_sigpending
 	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
 	jo	.Lsysc_notify_resume
 	TSTMSK	__LC_CPU_FLAGS,(_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY|_CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY)
@@ -855,8 +856,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
 	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING
 	jo	.Lio_patch_pending
 #endif
-	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
-	jo	.Lio_sigpending
+	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
+	jnz	.Lio_sigpending
 	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
 	jo	.Lio_notify_resume
 	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
index 9e900a8977bd..b27b6c1f058d 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
@@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	current->thread.system_call =
 		test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0;
 
-	if (get_signal(&ksig)) {
+	if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING) && get_signal(&ksig)) {
 		/* Whee!  Actually deliver the signal.  */
 		if (current->thread.system_call) {
 			regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call;

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
  2020-11-03 14:09   ` Jens Axboe
@ 2020-11-03 15:03     ` Sven Schnelle
  2020-11-03 15:12       ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Sven Schnelle @ 2020-11-03 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

Hi Jens,

Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:

> On 11/3/20 4:00 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>> 
>> Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes:
>> 
>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting
>>>> for details:
>>>>
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/
>>>>
>>>> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs,
>>>> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm
>>>> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the
>>>> arch tree. Let me know.
>>>>
>>>>  arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++
>>>>  arch/s390/kernel/entry.S            | 7 ++++++-
>>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>>>  #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE	4	/* load guarded storage control block */
>>>>  #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING	5	/* pending live patching update */
>>>>  #define TIF_PGSTE		6	/* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
>>>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	7	/* signal notifications exist */
>>>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP		8	/* Run process with isolated BP */
>>>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST	9	/* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */
>>>>  
>>>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>>>  #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT	27	/* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>>>>  
>>>>  #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
>>>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>>>  #define _TIF_SIGPENDING		BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
>>>>  #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED	BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
>>>>  #define _TIF_UPROBE		BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE  = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
>>>>  STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
>>>>  
>>>>  _TIF_WORK	= (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
>>>> -		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
>>>> +		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
>>>> +		   _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>>>  _TIF_TRACE	= (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
>>>>  		   _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
>>>>  _CIF_WORK	= (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
>>>> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>>>>  #endif
>>>>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
>>>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>>> +	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>>> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>>>>  #endif
>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>>  	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>>>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>>> +	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>>>  	jo	.Lio_notify_resume
>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
>>>
>>> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below).
>>>
>>> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that:
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>>>  #endif
>>>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
>>> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>> -	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>> 
>> We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means
>> 'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one
>> bit is set'
>
> Ah thanks, good catch. And you also caught the braino in signal.c, here's
> the end result:
>
>
> commit 0eb7d372d5319970bd15f2dbc18264ea576214d4
> Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> Date:   Fri Oct 9 15:34:12 2020 -0600
>
>     s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>     
>     Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>     
>     Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>     Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>  #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE	4	/* load guarded storage control block */
>  #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING	5	/* pending live patching update */
>  #define TIF_PGSTE		6	/* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	7	/* signal notifications exist */
>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP		8	/* Run process with isolated BP */
>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST	9	/* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */
>  
> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>  #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT	27	/* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>  
>  #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>  #define _TIF_SIGPENDING		BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
>  #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED	BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
>  #define _TIF_UPROBE		BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> index 86235919c2d1..19a89f292290 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE  = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
>  STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
>  
>  _TIF_WORK	= (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
> -		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
> +		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
> +		   _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>  _TIF_TRACE	= (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
>  		   _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
>  _CIF_WORK	= (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
> @@ -463,8 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>  #endif
>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> -	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
> +	jnz	.Lsysc_sigpending
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>  	jo	.Lsysc_notify_resume
>  	TSTMSK	__LC_CPU_FLAGS,(_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY|_CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY)
> @@ -855,8 +856,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING
>  	jo	.Lio_patch_pending
>  #endif
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> -	jo	.Lio_sigpending
> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
> +	jnz	.Lio_sigpending
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>  	jo	.Lio_notify_resume
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> index 9e900a8977bd..b27b6c1f058d 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  	current->thread.system_call =
>  		test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0;
>  
> -	if (get_signal(&ksig)) {
> +	if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING) && get_signal(&ksig)) {
>  		/* Whee!  Actually deliver the signal.  */
>  		if (current->thread.system_call) {
>  			regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call;

Looks good, feel free to add my Acked-by.

Thanks
Sven

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
  2020-11-03 15:03     ` Sven Schnelle
@ 2020-11-03 15:12       ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-03 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sven Schnelle
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

On 11/3/20 8:03 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:
> 
>> On 11/3/20 4:00 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote:
>>> Hi Jens,
>>>
>>> Heiko Carstens <hca () linux ! ibm ! com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting
>>>>> for details:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/
>>>>>
>>>>> As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs,
>>>>> as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm
>>>>> happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the
>>>>> arch tree. Let me know.
>>>>>
>>>>>  arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++
>>>>>  arch/s390/kernel/entry.S            | 7 ++++++-
>>>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>>>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>>>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>>>>  #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE	4	/* load guarded storage control block */
>>>>>  #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING	5	/* pending live patching update */
>>>>>  #define TIF_PGSTE		6	/* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
>>>>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	7	/* signal notifications exist */
>>>>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP		8	/* Run process with isolated BP */
>>>>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST	9	/* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */
>>>>>  
>>>>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>>>>  #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT	27	/* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>>>>>  
>>>>>  #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
>>>>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>>>>  #define _TIF_SIGPENDING		BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
>>>>>  #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED	BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
>>>>>  #define _TIF_UPROBE		BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>>> index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE  = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
>>>>>  STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
>>>>>  
>>>>>  _TIF_WORK	= (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
>>>>> -		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
>>>>> +		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
>>>>> +		   _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>>>>  _TIF_TRACE	= (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
>>>>>  		   _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
>>>>>  _CIF_WORK	= (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
>>>>> @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>>>>>  #endif
>>>>>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>>>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
>>>>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>>>> +	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>>>> @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>>>>>  #endif
>>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>>>  	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>>>>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>>>> +	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>>>>  	jo	.Lio_notify_resume
>>>>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
>>>>
>>>> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below).
>>>>
>>>> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that:
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>>>> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>>>>  #endif
>>>>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
>>>> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>>> -	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>>> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>>>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>>
>>> We need to also change the jo to jnz - in combination with tm, jo means
>>> 'jump if all tested bits are set' while jnz means 'jump if at least one
>>> bit is set'
>>
>> Ah thanks, good catch. And you also caught the braino in signal.c, here's
>> the end result:
>>
>>
>> commit 0eb7d372d5319970bd15f2dbc18264ea576214d4
>> Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>> Date:   Fri Oct 9 15:34:12 2020 -0600
>>
>>     s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
>>     
>>     Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>>     
>>     Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>>     Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
>>     Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>  #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE	4	/* load guarded storage control block */
>>  #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING	5	/* pending live patching update */
>>  #define TIF_PGSTE		6	/* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
>> +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	7	/* signal notifications exist */
>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP		8	/* Run process with isolated BP */
>>  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST	9	/* Run KVM guests with isolated BP */
>>  
>> @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
>>  #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT	27	/* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>>  
>>  #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
>> +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>  #define _TIF_SIGPENDING		BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
>>  #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED	BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
>>  #define _TIF_UPROBE		BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> index 86235919c2d1..19a89f292290 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
>> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE  = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
>>  STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
>>  
>>  _TIF_WORK	= (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
>> -		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
>> +		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
>> +		   _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>>  _TIF_TRACE	= (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
>>  		   _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
>>  _CIF_WORK	= (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
>> @@ -463,8 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>>  #endif
>>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
>> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>> -	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>> +	jnz	.Lsysc_sigpending
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>  	jo	.Lsysc_notify_resume
>>  	TSTMSK	__LC_CPU_FLAGS,(_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY|_CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY)
>> @@ -855,8 +856,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING
>>  	jo	.Lio_patch_pending
>>  #endif
>> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
>> -	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>> +	jnz	.Lio_sigpending
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>>  	jo	.Lio_notify_resume
>>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
>> index 9e900a8977bd..b27b6c1f058d 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
>> @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>  	current->thread.system_call =
>>  		test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0;
>>  
>> -	if (get_signal(&ksig)) {
>> +	if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING) && get_signal(&ksig)) {
>>  		/* Whee!  Actually deliver the signal.  */
>>  		if (current->thread.system_call) {
>>  			regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call;
> 
> Looks good, feel free to add my Acked-by.

Thanks for your help! Added.

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
       [not found] <54c02fa6-8c8a-667f-af99-e83a1f150586 () kernel ! dk>
@ 2020-11-03 10:54 ` Sven Schnelle
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Sven Schnelle @ 2020-11-03 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List, Qian Cai

Jens Axboe <axboe () kernel ! dk> writes:

> On 11/2/20 9:59 AM, Qian Cai wrote:
>> On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>> 
>> Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional patch
>> from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole
>> series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced
>> compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit
>> af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1]
>
> That's odd, it should build fine without that patch. How did it fail for you?
>
> Can you try and add this on top? Looks like I forgot the signal change for
> s390, though that shouldn't really cause any issues.
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> index 9e900a8977bd..a68c3796a1bf 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  	current->thread.system_call =
>  		test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0;
>  
> -	if (get_signal(&ksig)) {
> +	if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) && get_signal(&ksig)) {

Shouldn't that be TIF_SIGPENDING?

>  		/* Whee!  Actually deliver the signal.  */
>  		if (current->thread.system_call) {
>  			regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call;

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
  2020-11-02 19:50       ` Jens Axboe
@ 2020-11-02 21:15         ` Qian Cai
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Qian Cai @ 2020-11-02 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 12:50 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Ah, but that's because later patches assume that TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL is
> always there once all archs have been converted. If you just want to back
> out that patch, you'll need to just revert this one:
> 
> commit 82ef6998ed9d488e56bbfbcc2ec9adf62bf78f08
> Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> Date:   Fri Oct 9 16:04:39 2020 -0600
> 
>     kernel: remove checking for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> 
> as well and I suspect it should build.

No, at the minimal, I'll need to revert those to build successfully.

7b074c15374c io_uring: remove 'twa_signal_ok' deadlock work-around
eb48a0f216fa kernel: remove checking for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
c634e6b63a81 signal: kill JOBCTL_TASK_WORK
f8b667db31a3 io_uring: JOBCTL_TASK_WORK is no longer used by task_work
4c3d9c3b415a s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL

Then, it will fix the boot issue as well.





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
  2020-11-02 18:58     ` Qian Cai
@ 2020-11-02 19:50       ` Jens Axboe
  2020-11-02 21:15         ` Qian Cai
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-02 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Qian Cai
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

On 11/2/20 11:58 AM, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 10:07 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 11/2/20 9:59 AM, Qian Cai wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>>>
>>> Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional
>>> patch
>>> from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole
>>> series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced
>>> compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit
>>> af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1]
>>
>> That's odd, it should build fine without that patch. How did it fail for you?
> 
> In file included from ./arch/s390/include/asm/bug.h:5,
>                  from ./include/linux/bug.h:5,
>                  from ./include/linux/mmdebug.h:5,
>                  from ./include/linux/percpu.h:5,
>                  from ./include/linux/context_tracking_state.h:5,
>                  from ./include/linux/hardirq.h:5,
>                  from ./include/linux/kvm_host.h:7,
>                  from arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c:11:
> ./include/linux/sched/signal.h: In function ‘signal_pending’:
> ./include/linux/sched/signal.h:368:39: error: ‘TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL’ undeclared
> (first use in this function); did you mean ‘TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME’?
>   if (unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)))
>                                        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ./include/linux/compiler.h:78:42: note: in definition of macro ‘unlikely’
>  # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0)
>                                           ^
> ./include/linux/sched/signal.h:368:39: note: each undeclared identifier is
> reported only once for each function it appears in
>   if (unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)))
>                                        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ./include/linux/compiler.h:78:42: note: in definition of macro ‘unlikely’
>  # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0)
>                                           ^
> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:117: arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error
> 1
> make: *** [Makefile:1198: prepare0] Error 2

Ah, but that's because later patches assume that TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL is
always there once all archs have been converted. If you just want to back
out that patch, you'll need to just revert this one:

commit 82ef6998ed9d488e56bbfbcc2ec9adf62bf78f08
Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Date:   Fri Oct 9 16:04:39 2020 -0600

    kernel: remove checking for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL

as well and I suspect it should build.

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
  2020-11-02 17:07   ` Jens Axboe
@ 2020-11-02 18:58     ` Qian Cai
  2020-11-02 19:50       ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Qian Cai @ 2020-11-02 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 10:07 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 11/2/20 9:59 AM, Qian Cai wrote:
> > On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
> > > > 
> > > > Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> > 
> > Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional
> > patch
> > from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole
> > series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced
> > compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit
> > af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1]
> 
> That's odd, it should build fine without that patch. How did it fail for you?

In file included from ./arch/s390/include/asm/bug.h:5,
                 from ./include/linux/bug.h:5,
                 from ./include/linux/mmdebug.h:5,
                 from ./include/linux/percpu.h:5,
                 from ./include/linux/context_tracking_state.h:5,
                 from ./include/linux/hardirq.h:5,
                 from ./include/linux/kvm_host.h:7,
                 from arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c:11:
./include/linux/sched/signal.h: In function ‘signal_pending’:
./include/linux/sched/signal.h:368:39: error: ‘TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL’ undeclared
(first use in this function); did you mean ‘TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME’?
  if (unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)))
                                       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/linux/compiler.h:78:42: note: in definition of macro ‘unlikely’
 # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0)
                                          ^
./include/linux/sched/signal.h:368:39: note: each undeclared identifier is
reported only once for each function it appears in
  if (unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)))
                                       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/linux/compiler.h:78:42: note: in definition of macro ‘unlikely’
 # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0)
                                          ^
make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:117: arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error
1
make: *** [Makefile:1198: prepare0] Error 2

> 
> Can you try and add this on top? Looks like I forgot the signal change for
> s390, though that shouldn't really cause any issues.

It does not help with the boot issue at all.

> 
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> index 9e900a8977bd..a68c3796a1bf 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  	current->thread.system_call =
>  		test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0;
>  
> -	if (get_signal(&ksig)) {
> +	if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) && get_signal(&ksig)) {
>  		/* Whee!  Actually deliver the signal.  */
>  		if (current->thread.system_call) {
>  			regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call;
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
  2020-11-02 16:59 ` Qian Cai
  2020-11-02 17:04   ` Heiko Carstens
@ 2020-11-02 17:07   ` Jens Axboe
  2020-11-02 18:58     ` Qian Cai
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-11-02 17:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Qian Cai
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

On 11/2/20 9:59 AM, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
>>>
>>> Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> 
> Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional patch
> from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole
> series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced
> compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit
> af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1]

That's odd, it should build fine without that patch. How did it fail for you?

Can you try and add this on top? Looks like I forgot the signal change for
s390, though that shouldn't really cause any issues.


diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
index 9e900a8977bd..a68c3796a1bf 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
@@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	current->thread.system_call =
 		test_pt_regs_flag(regs, PIF_SYSCALL) ? regs->int_code : 0;
 
-	if (get_signal(&ksig)) {
+	if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL) && get_signal(&ksig)) {
 		/* Whee!  Actually deliver the signal.  */
 		if (current->thread.system_call) {
 			regs->int_code = current->thread.system_call;

-- 
Jens Axboe


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
  2020-11-02 16:59 ` Qian Cai
@ 2020-11-02 17:04   ` Heiko Carstens
  2020-11-02 17:07   ` Jens Axboe
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Heiko Carstens @ 2020-11-02 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Qian Cai
  Cc: Jens Axboe, linux-s390, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 11:59:41AM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
> > > 
> > > Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
> > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> 
> Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional patch
> from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole
> series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced
> compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit
> af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1]
> 
> .config: https://cailca.coding.net/public/linux/mm/git/files/master/s390.config

I'll take a look at it, but probably not today anymore.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
       [not found] <20201101173153.GC9375 () osiris>
@ 2020-11-02 16:59 ` Qian Cai
  2020-11-02 17:04   ` Heiko Carstens
  2020-11-02 17:07   ` Jens Axboe
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Qian Cai @ 2020-11-02 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jens Axboe
  Cc: linux-s390, Heiko Carstens, linux-kernel, peterz, oleg, tglx,
	Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next Mailing List

On Sun, 2020-11-01 at 17:31 +0000, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:21:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > Wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL handling for s390.
> > 
> > Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>

Even though I did confirm that today's linux-next contains this additional patch
from Heiko below, a z10 guest is still unable to boot. Reverting the whole
series (reverting only "s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL" introduced
compiling errors) fixed the problem, i.e., git revert --no-edit
af0dd809f3d3..7b074c15374c [1]

.config: https://cailca.coding.net/public/linux/mm/git/files/master/s390.config

01: [    3.284902] systemd[1]: systemd 239 (239-40.el8) running in system mode. 
01: (+PAM +AUDIT +SELINUX +IMA -APPARMOR +SMACK +SYSVINIT +UTMP +LIBCRYPTSETUP +
01: GCRYPT +GNUTLS +ACL +XZ +LZ4 +SECCOMP +BLKID +ELFUTILS +KMOD +IDN2 -IDN +PCR
01: E2 default-hierarchy=legacy)                                                
01: [    3.285558] systemd[1]: Detected virtualization zvm.                     
01: [    3.285585] systemd[1]: Detected architecture s390x.                     
01: [    3.285618] systemd[1]: Running in initial RAM disk.                     
01: [    3.376459] systemd[1]: Set hostname to <ibm-z-137.rhts.eng.bos.redhat.co
01: m>.                                                                         
01: [    3.464950] mkdir (45) used greatest stack depth: 57824 bytes left       
01:                                                                             
01: Welcome to [0;34mRed Hat Enterprise Linux 8.3 (Ootpa) dracut-049-95.git20200
01: 804.el8 (Initramfs)[0m!                                                     
01:                                                                             
00: [   87.908107] random: crng init done     
                                     
01: [  490.492263] INFO: task (sd-executor):42 can't die for more than 368 secon
01: ds.                                                                         
01: [  490.492303] task:(sd-executor)   state:R  running task     stack:58984 pi
01: d:   42 ppid:     1 flags:0x00000002                                        
01: [  490.492359] Call Trace:                                                  
01: [  490.492382]  [<00000000163f0652>] __schedule+0xa12/0x1840                
01: [  490.492391]  [<00000000163f1562>] schedule+0xe2/0x310
(inlined by) __preempt_count_add at arch/s390/include/asm/preempt.h:56
(discriminator 1)
(inlined by) __preempt_count_sub at arch/s390/include/asm/preempt.h:63
(discriminator 1)
(inlined by) schedule at kernel/sched/core.c:4602 (discriminator 1)
01: [  490.492399]  [<000000001640390a>] system_call+0xe2/0x278
system_call at arch/s390/kernel/entry.S:424
01: [  490.492407] no locks held by (sd-executor)/42.                           
01: [  490.492420]                                                              
01: [  490.492420] Showing all locks held in the system:                        
01: [  490.492438] 1 lock held by khungtaskd/25:                                
01: [  490.492445]  #0: 0000000016b92c80 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rcu_lo
01: ck_acquire.constprop.54+0x0/0x50                                            
01: [  490.492481]                                                              
01: [  490.492488] =============================================                
01: [  490.492488]

[1]:
7b074c15374c io_uring: remove 'twa_signal_ok' deadlock work-around
eb48a0f216fa kernel: remove checking for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
c634e6b63a81 signal: kill JOBCTL_TASK_WORK
f8b667db31a3 io_uring: JOBCTL_TASK_WORK is no longer used by task_work
c50eb9d59bb1 task_work: remove legacy TWA_SIGNAL path
1d48c8d6d71e xtensa: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
8ef9c750c5a1 um: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
3f242a158b7c sparc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
40c7ac5c4790 sh: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
5e59963ed1ac riscv: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
9333d15595e8 openrisc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
c34f87ae2e81 nds32: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
27af2ca0cdda microblaze: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
ef1863c4081e ia64: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
58d670021acc hexagon: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
1facd6bf079c h8300: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
1b81145fc28d csky: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
bbc8d03c0bf3 c6x: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
6cbc413682ac arm: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
e9822185daa1 alpha: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
4c3d9c3b415a s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
d0772a4d9367 mips: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
07246df9ebe4 powerpc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
9edbc08ce909 parisc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
c96152dd9c01 nios32: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
89d22e3adff3 m68k: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
3db7550a998c arm64: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
9161d936d1ff arc: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
fdb5f027ce66 task_work: use TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL if available
323b0fba756d x86: wire up TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
a1a5bc3e8659 kernel: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
c0947f6b6ed2 kernel: add task_sigpending() helper

> > ---
> > 
> > 5.11 has support queued up for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, see this posting
> > for details:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20201026203230.386348-1-axboe@kernel.dk/
> > 
> > As part of that work, I'm adding TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL support to all archs,
> > as that will enable a set of cleanups once all of them support it. I'm
> > happy carrying this patch if need be, or it can be funelled through the
> > arch tree. Let me know.
> > 
> >  arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h | 2 ++
> >  arch/s390/kernel/entry.S            | 7 ++++++-
> >  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
> > b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
> > index 13a04fcf7762..0045341ade48 100644
> > --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
> > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/thread_info.h
> > @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
> >  #define TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE	4	/* load guarded storage control
> > block */
> >  #define TIF_PATCH_PENDING	5	/* pending live patching update */
> >  #define TIF_PGSTE		6	/* New mm's will use 4K page tables */
> > +#define TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	7	/* signal notifications exist */
> >  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP		8	/* Run process with isolated BP */
> >  #define TIF_ISOLATE_BP_GUEST	9	/* Run KVM guests with isolated BP
> > */
> >  
> > @@ -82,6 +83,7 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void);
> >  #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT	27	/* syscall tracepoint
> > instrumentation */
> >  
> >  #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
> > +#define _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL	BIT(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
> >  #define _TIF_SIGPENDING		BIT(TIF_SIGPENDING)
> >  #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED	BIT(TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
> >  #define _TIF_UPROBE		BIT(TIF_UPROBE)
> > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> > index 86235919c2d1..a30d891e8045 100644
> > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> > @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ STACK_SIZE  = 1 << STACK_SHIFT
> >  STACK_INIT = STACK_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD - __PT_SIZE
> >  
> >  _TIF_WORK	= (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | \
> > -		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING)
> > +		   _TIF_UPROBE | _TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE | _TIF_PATCH_PENDING | \
> > +		   _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
> >  _TIF_TRACE	= (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \
> >  		   _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
> >  _CIF_WORK	= (_CIF_ASCE_PRIMARY | _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY | _CIF_FPU)
> > @@ -463,6 +464,8 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
> >  #endif
> >  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
> >  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
> > +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> > +	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
> >  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> >  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
> >  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
> > @@ -857,6 +860,8 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
> >  #endif
> >  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> >  	jo	.Lio_sigpending
> > +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> > +	jo	.Lio_sigpending
> >  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
> >  	jo	.Lio_notify_resume
> >  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_GUARDED_STORAGE
> 
> (full quote so you can make sense of the patch below).
> 
> Please merge the patch below into this one. With that:
> 
> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> index a30d891e8045..31f16d903ef3 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/entry.S
> @@ -464,9 +464,7 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
>  #endif
>  	TSTMSK	__PT_FLAGS(%r11),_PIF_SYSCALL_RESTART
>  	jo	.Lsysc_syscall_restart
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> -	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>  	jo	.Lsysc_sigpending
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>  	jo	.Lsysc_notify_resume
> @@ -858,9 +856,7 @@ ENTRY(io_int_handler)
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_PATCH_PENDING
>  	jo	.Lio_patch_pending
>  #endif
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_SIGPENDING
> -	jo	.Lio_sigpending
> -	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> +	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),(_TIF_SIGPENDING|_TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)
>  	jo	.Lio_sigpending
>  	TSTMSK	__TI_flags(%r12),_TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME
>  	jo	.Lio_notify_resum


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-11-03 15:13 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <20201101173153.GC9375@osiris>
2020-11-03 11:00 ` [PATCH] s390: add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL Sven Schnelle
2020-11-03 14:09   ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-03 15:03     ` Sven Schnelle
2020-11-03 15:12       ` Jens Axboe
     [not found] <54c02fa6-8c8a-667f-af99-e83a1f150586 () kernel ! dk>
2020-11-03 10:54 ` Sven Schnelle
     [not found] <20201101173153.GC9375 () osiris>
2020-11-02 16:59 ` Qian Cai
2020-11-02 17:04   ` Heiko Carstens
2020-11-02 17:07   ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-02 18:58     ` Qian Cai
2020-11-02 19:50       ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-02 21:15         ` Qian Cai

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).