Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Nov 2022 01:10:06 -0800 | From | Deepak Gupta <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] riscv: VMAP_STACK overflow detection thread-safe |
| |
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 08:59:32AM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote: >On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:10:22PM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 02:31:25PM +0800, Guo Ren wrote: >> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 1:57 PM Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com> wrote: > >> > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 5:28 PM Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org> wrote: > >> > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 8:50 AM Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com> wrote: > >> > > >> Fixes: 31da94c25aea835ceac00575a9fd206c5a833fed >> > > > >> > > > The patch gives more significant change than the Fixes, and Fixes would expand to the previous stable versions. Please don't set it as a Fixes, but an improved OVERSTACK dead path performance feature. >> > > > >> > > >> > > Not a performance feature but more like correctness. >> > > If kernel died and two CPUs raced to kernel stack overflow, >> > > death post-mortem should be straightforward. >> > We already have had a fixup, and your patch likes a feature with a >> > significant change. >> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20221030124517.2370-1-jszhang@kernel.org/ >> > If it is for correctness, the simple lock is enough. >> >> Sure lock is enough. It's different way to solve the problem. But I don't >> think it qualifies as significant change. > >Something to bear in mind is where in the cycle we are - there's likely >just over a week left before v6.1. >Since the lock is sufficient to fix the problem for v6.1, it's easy to >view this patch as an optimisation or improvement that should go on top >of that, smaller, patch. >Especially when you have some questions yourself about the correctness >for 32 bit!
Yes I'll have to revise the patch to accomodate 32bit.
>I've got no technical comment to make about the discussion here, but >looking in from the "outside", that's the easy conclusion to jump to. > > >> REG_S x31, TASK_TI_SPILL_REG(tp) >> asm_per_cpu sp, overflow_stack, x31 >> li x31, OVERFLOW_STACK_SIZE >> add sp, sp, x31 >> REG_L x31, TASK_TI_SPILL_REG(tp) > >btw, for this sort of thing, could you please use some whitespace to >align the operands? Makes things significantly more readable. >
Noted. I'll do that.
>Thanks, >Conor. >
| |