Re: Thread flags modified without set_thread_flag() (non atomically)

[Andi Kleen]

> It does seem risky.  Perhaps it is a micro-optimisation which utilises
> knowledge that this thread_struct cannot be looked up via any path in this
> context.
> 
> Or perhaps it is a bug.  Andi, can you please comment?

On flush_thread nobody else can mess with the thread, so yes it's a micro
optimization.

> 
> > And about this specific flush_thread, I am puzzled about the t->flags ^= 
> > (_TIF_ABI_PENDING | _TIF_IA32); line. The XOR will clearly flip the 
> > _TIF_ABI_PENDING bit to 0, and very likely set _TIF_IA32 to the opposite 
> > of its current value. Why does this change need to be written atomically 
> > (can other threads play with these flags ?) ?
> > 
> 
> Don't know.

iirc it came from DaveM originally. He just likes to write things in 
comp^wclever ways :0) It's just a little shorter.

> No, I don't immediately see anything in the flush_old_exec() code path
> which tells us that nobody else can look up this thread_info (or be holding
> a ref to it) in this context.

Normally the process flags atomicity should only matter with signals;
i don't think you can send a signal to a process being in exec this way.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/