Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 12:40:51 +0100 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> Subject: Re: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/32: Add AT_SYSINFO cancellation helpers * Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> [2016-03-09 12:34:50 +0100]: > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> [2016-03-09 09:56:31 +0100]: > > Why is so much complexity added to avoid a ~3 instructions window where > > calcellation is tested? Cancellation at work atom boundaries is a fundamentally > > 'polling' model anyway, and signal delivery is asynchronous, with a fundamental > > IPI delay if it's cross-CPU. > > > > to avoid the race when the thread is cancelled after the test but before > the syscall see http://ewontfix.com/16/ > wrong link http://ewontfix.com/2/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.