lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Q: does force_iret() make any sense today?
On 12/18, Brian Gerst wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 10:31 AM Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > I do not pretend I understand the arch/x86/entry/ code, but it seems that
> > asm does all the necessary checks and the "extra" TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME simply
> > has no effect except tracehook_notify_resume() will be called for no reason?
>
> It's a relic of a time before the more robust checks for
> SYSRET/SYSEXIT were added. The idea was to divert the syscall return
> flow off the fast path. Even if no exit work was done, the slow path
> always returned with IRET. But with all the entry rework that has
> been done it is no longer needed and can be removed.

Thanks, this was my understanding. Will you make a patch?

Oleg.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-18 17:07    [W:0.029 / U:1.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site