[PATCH v4 2/5] x86,entry: Only call user_exit if TIF_NOHZ
fweisbec at gmail.com
Thu Jul 31 09:49:20 PDT 2014
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 06:42:46PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/31, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:23:34AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > >
> > > At the end of the day, the syscall slowpath code calls a bunch of
> > > functions depending on what TIF_XYZ flags are set. As long as it's
> > > structured like "if (TIF_A) do_a(); if (TIF_B) do_b();" or something
> > > like that, it's comprehensible. But once random functions with no
> > > explicit flag checks or comments start showing up, it gets confusing.
> > Yeah that's a point. I don't mind much the TIF_NOHZ test if you like.
> And in my opinion
> if (work & TIF_XYZ)
> looks even more confusing. Because, once again, TIF_XYZ is not the
> reason to call user_exit().
> Not to mention this adds a minor performance penalty.
That's a point too! You guys both convinced me! ;-)
> > > If it's indeed all-or-nothing, I could remove the check and add a
> > > comment. But please keep in mind that, currently, the slow path is
> > > *slow*, and my patches only improve the entry case. So enabling
> > > context tracking on every task will hurt.
> > That's what we do anyway. I haven't found a safe way to enabled context tracking
> > without tracking all CPUs.
> And if we change this, then the code above becomes racy. The state of
> TIF_XYZ can be changed right after the check. OK, it is racy anyway ;)
> but still this adds more confusion.
No because all running tasks have this flag set when context tracking is
enabled. And context tracking can't be disabled on runtime.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel