mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "André Almeida" <andrealmeid@collabora.com>
To: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	peterz@infradead.org, krisman@collabora.com,
	kernel@collabora.com, dvhart@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	pgriffais@valvesoftware.com, fweimer@redhat.com,
	libc-alpha@sourceware.org, malteskarupke@web.de,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/4] futex2: Add new futex interface
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:45:55 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4c9e997a-bbad-f3f2-0c9b-277aebf960c5@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d9163924224d4265c280fc2ca6481c3@natalenko.name>

Hi

On 7/10/20 10:23 AM, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> On 09.07.2020 19:59, André Almeida wrote:
>> This RFC is a followup to the previous discussion initiated from my last
>> patch "futex: Implement mechanism to wait on any of several futexes"[1].
>> As stated in the thread, the correct approach to move forward with the
>> wait multiple operation would be to create a new syscall that would have
>> all new cool features.
>>
>> The first patch adds the new interface and just translate the call for
>> the old interface, without implementing new features. The goal here is
>> to establish the interface and to check if everyone is happy with this
>> API. The rest of patches are selftests to show the interface in action.
>> I have the following questions:
>>
>> - What suggestions do you have to implement this? Start from scratch or
>>   reuse the most code possible?
>>
>> - The interface seems correct and implements the requirements asked by
>> you?
>>
>> Those are the cool new features that this syscall should address some
>> day:
>>
>> - Operate with variable bit size futexes, not restricted to 32:
>>   8, 16 and 64
>>
>> - Wait on multiple futexes, using the following semantics:
>>
>>   struct futex_wait {
>>     void *uaddr;
>>     unsigned long val;
>>     unsigned long flags;
>>   };
>>
>>   sys_futex_waitv(struct futex_wait *waiters, unsigned int nr_waiters,
>>           unsigned long flags, struct __kernel_timespec *timo);
>>
>> - Have NUMA optimizations: if FUTEX_NUMA_FLAG is set, the `void *uaddr`
>>   argument won't be a value of type u{8, 16, 32, 64} anymore, but a
>> struct
>>   containing a NUMA node hint:
>>
>>   struct futex32_numa {
>>       u32 value __attribute__ ((aligned (8)));
>>       u32 hint;
>>   };
>>
>>   struct futex64_numa {
>>       u64 value __attribute__ ((aligned (16)));
>>       u64 hint;
>>   };
>>
>> Thanks,
>>     André
>>
>> Changes since v1:
>>  - The timeout argument now uses __kernel_timespec as type
>>  - time32 interface was removed
>>  v1: https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/cover/1255437/
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1194339/
>>
>> André Almeida (4):
>>   futex2: Add new futex interface
>>   selftests: futex: Add futex2 wake/wait test
>>   selftests: futex: Add futex2 timeout test
>>   selftests: futex: Add futex2 wouldblock test
>>
>>  MAINTAINERS                                   |   2 +-
>>  arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl        |   2 +
>>  arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl        |   2 +
>>  include/linux/syscalls.h                      |   7 ++
>>  include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h             |   8 +-
>>  include/uapi/linux/futex.h                    |  10 ++
>>  init/Kconfig                                  |   7 ++
>>  kernel/Makefile                               |   1 +
>>  kernel/futex2.c                               |  73 ++++++++++++
>>  kernel/sys_ni.c                               |   4 +
>>  tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h       |   7 +-
>>  .../selftests/futex/functional/.gitignore     |   1 +
>>  .../selftests/futex/functional/Makefile       |   4 +-
>>  .../selftests/futex/functional/futex2_wait.c  | 111 ++++++++++++++++++
>>  .../futex/functional/futex_wait_timeout.c     |  38 ++++--
>>  .../futex/functional/futex_wait_wouldblock.c  |  33 +++++-
>>  .../testing/selftests/futex/functional/run.sh |   3 +
>>  .../selftests/futex/include/futex2test.h      |  77 ++++++++++++
>>  18 files changed, 373 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>  create mode 100644 kernel/futex2.c
>>  create mode 100644
>> tools/testing/selftests/futex/functional/futex2_wait.c
>>  create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/futex/include/futex2test.h
> 
> What branch/tag this submission is based on please? It seems it is not a
> 5.8 but rather 5.7 since the second patch misses faccessat2() syscall
> and fails to be applied cleanly.
> 

As stated in MAINTAINERS[1], this submission is based on locking/core
branch from tip/tip[2] tree. The most updated release tag in this tree
is v5.8-rc1. My patches applied on top of locking/core are available in
my tree: https://gitlab.collabora.com/tonyk/linux/-/commits/futex2

According to 6c3c184fc420 ("tools headers API: Update faccessat2
affected files"), it seems that `faccessat2` entry at
`tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h` was added after the syscall
was merged, so that's why 5.8-rc1 misses the syscall in this specific
file. Rebasing locking/core in 5.8-rc2 or above will fix that.

> Thanks.
> 

Thanks,
	André

[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/MAINTAINERS?h=v5.8-rc4#n7102

[2]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/log/?h=locking/core

      reply	other threads:[~2020-07-10 13:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-09 17:59 André Almeida
2020-07-09 17:59 ` [RFC v2 1/4] " André Almeida
2020-07-10  0:09   ` Randy Dunlap
2020-07-10  0:19     ` André Almeida
2020-07-09 17:59 ` [RFC v2 2/4] selftests: futex: Add futex2 wake/wait test André Almeida
2020-07-09 17:59 ` [RFC v2 3/4] selftests: futex: Add futex2 timeout test André Almeida
2020-07-09 17:59 ` [RFC v2 4/4] selftests: futex: Add futex2 wouldblock test André Almeida
2020-07-10 13:23 ` [RFC v2 0/4] futex2: Add new futex interface Oleksandr Natalenko
2020-07-10 13:45   ` André Almeida [this message]

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=4c9e997a-bbad-f3f2-0c9b-277aebf960c5@collabora.com \
    --to=andrealmeid@collabora.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=kernel@collabora.com \
    --cc=krisman@collabora.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=malteskarupke@web.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleksandr@natalenko.name \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pgriffais@valvesoftware.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®