From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Americo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC x86_64 more accurate KSTK_ESP implementation
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:08:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091105110857.GR31511@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1257409189.26874.18.camel@wall-e>
> +void update_usersp(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + unsigned long stk = (unsigned long)task_stack_page(current);
> + unsigned long stkp = (regs)->sp;
> +
> + if (((stkp < stk) || (stkp >= stk + THREAD_SIZE))
> + && regs->ip < PAGE_OFFSET)
> + percpu_write(old_rsp, stkp);
This does not handle interrupt and exception stacks correctly.
Also regs->ip is never a safe check for running in user space,
because a program can set the IP to a arbitrary value for a one
instruction window.
The larger problem is also if the kernel moves to no-tick-for-non-idle
(which I guess will happen sooner or later) your method won't
work anyways, or again be arbitarily inaccurate. Even today 10ms
worst time inaccuracy for HZ=100 is rather bad, there can be a lot of stack
allocations in that time. And adding new dependencies on a regular
timer when everything else is moving away from that doesn't seem right.
Also I suspect this method won't work on preempt-rt without
additional tweaks.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-05 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-03 7:31 [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads Stefani Seibold
2009-11-03 8:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-03 9:06 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-03 18:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-05 8:19 ` [PATCH] RFC x86_64 more accurate KSTK_ESP implementation Stefani Seibold
2009-11-05 11:08 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2009-11-05 12:11 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 11:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-08 12:51 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 12:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-08 14:00 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 16:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-11-08 19:37 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-05 13:02 ` [PATCH] fix /proc/<pid>/stat stack pointer for kernel threads Stefani Seibold
2009-11-13 8:01 ` [tip:x86/urgent] fs: " Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 11:17 ` [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads Andi Kleen
2009-11-04 11:50 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 12:00 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-04 12:22 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 15:42 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 22:21 ` Stefani Seibold
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20091105110857.GR31511@one.firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=stefani@seibold.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome