Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 22:20:23 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@google.com>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>,
        rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH for 4.16 02/21] rseq: Introduce restartable sequences
 system call (v12)
Message-ID: <20171214212023.GJ3326@worktop>
References: <20171214161403.30643-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
 <20171214161403.30643-3-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712141033100.6249@nuc-kabylake>
 <12046460.34426.1513275177081.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712141238180.8340@nuc-kabylake>
 <1537392285.34532.1513279478488.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712141512360.8945@nuc-kabylake>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712141512360.8945@nuc-kabylake>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22.1 (2013-10-16)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 668
Lines: 15

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 03:14:00PM -0600, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2017, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> 
> > If we port this concept to kernel-space (as I start to understand
> > would be your wish), then a simple pointer store to the current
> > task_struct would suffice.
> 
> Certainly such a port would be beneficial for non x86 archs.
> 
> But my company has extensive user space code that maintains a lot of
> counters and does other tricks to get full performance out of the
> hardware. Such a mechanism would also be good from user space. Why keep
> the good stuff only inside the kernel?

Mathieu's proposal is for userspace, _only_ userspace.