Re: Restartable Sequences system call merged into Linux

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

----- On Jun 14, 2018, at 10:00 AM, Florian Weimer fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> On 06/14/2018 03:49 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
>>>>> - rseq_preempt(): on preemption, the scheduler sets the TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME thread
>>>>>    flag, so rseq_handle_notify_resume() can check whether it's in a rseq critical
>>>>>    section when returning to user-space,
>>>>> - rseq_signal_deliver(): on signal delivery, rseq_handle_notify_resume() checks
>>>>>    whether it's in a rseq critical section,
>>>>> - rseq_migrate: on migration, the scheduler sets TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME as well,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this is not likely to be noticeable.
>>>>
>>>> But the proposal wanted to add a syscall to thread creation, right?
>>>> And I believe that may be noticeable.
>>>
>>> Fair point! Do we have a standard benchmark that would stress this ?
>> 
>> Web server performance benchmarks basically test clone() performance
>> in many cases.
> 
> Isn't that fork?  I expect that the rseq arena is inherited on fork and
> fork-type clone, otherwise it's going to be painful.

On fork or clone creating a new process, the rseq tls area is inherited
from the thread that does the fork syscall.

On creation of a new thread with clone, there is no such inheritance.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com