Re: [PATCH 0/3] Modernize tasklet callback API
Date: Mon Aug 03 2020 - 04:46:32 EST
> [heavily trimmed CC list because I think lkml is ignoring this
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:03:55AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Kees,
> > Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > This is the infrastructure changes to prepare the tasklet API for
> > > conversion to passing the tasklet struct as the callback argument instead
> > > of an arbitrary unsigned long. The first patch details why this is useful
> > > (it's the same rationale as the timer_struct changes from a bit ago:
> > > less abuse during memory corruption attacks, more in line with existing
> > > ways of doing things in the kernel, save a little space in struct,
> > > etc). Notably, the existing tasklet API use is much less messy, so there
> > > is less to clean up.
> > >
> > > It's not clear to me which tree this should go through... Greg since it
> > > starts with a USB clean-up, -tip for timer or interrupt, or if I should
> > > just carry it. I'm open to suggestions, but if I don't hear otherwise,
> > > I'll just carry it.
> > >
> > > My goal is to have this merged for v5.9-rc1 so that during the v5.10
> > > development cycle the new API will be available. The entire tree of
> > > changes is here currently, but to split it up by maintainer the
> > > infrastructure changes need to be landed first.
> > >
> > > Review and Acks appreciated! :)
> > I'd rather see tasklets vanish from the planet completely, but that's
> > going to be a daring feat. So, grudgingly:
> Understood! I will update the comments near the tasklet API.
> > Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Here's the series re-based on top of 5.8
Let me know how you would want these to be reviewed.
Also, I was thinking if removing tasklets completely could be a task
on KSPP wiki. If yes, I did like to take ownership of that task. I have a
couple of ideas in mind, which could be discussed in a separate email.