Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp4889953ybv; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:54:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwLFfsyH7Uk5mPqYTNoJUaDXfKns8hqhyyeK54aXavmrygJwTkyMSSueXQI5mLVehJOajuA X-Received: by 2002:aca:1011:: with SMTP id 17mr10768301oiq.72.1581954890688; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:54:50 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1581954890; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=paKWPxBJG9fJH9C9rVu2kdSrZ24vm992EO2EqAaoOEYaQRwiLOwl3nTI+UYJQ/fND+ zwUX6WSdjC+ba1xcdXQDYD+f640sgm1Ya8BPyEP7pzfkSB3+J1W3I7bOHjrIqkJH0LAO GvVTDQxpDvvG6K7oQ51LUqMnIp9/uEPfJNuy20AxlBBz5mrUDz12YAMn88K1DWm2VuPs kzM7khfCA3PPQ53bTt0l/agCyGiQ9MdPW1De9VwN+8eDFnCHsq6AEvoZRrCqL3cWX/eR 0bI7+XWt6DiT07ikw2P12bSQ6Q/f7I9CLZlh3QmrQcy+ErRbnPY4NmFV3WIz99eF3nVC jdWA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from; bh=s4kp+AGLm5S//49aKXJ27SyK/EoNDzmKRw4OAttRtNk=; b=MhJiBZ3k15dXNQXEygCINCro4XuRc5pslqD4vYVz2YOeRcDknnvDOICyVq5tssnNCu 12tAgFhRnBhsCPSgFbwJovEtPI2N/7A/5JSxT+5Fq4NqiwODOePqEibJCjorHOBDgdww b9Hm2Tu1NNOI9qYsyUE2NfCnfL7JFGT0ULS9ch5KhrfkzyNHmIsuQMmA5PGUf6aQ/pqD aSirQ2kK9EjEhH3zOYZewl9PdNqDsyCboRQqDbM1u5MlNyT15900mqknmSV0X8i1xkdp 9chU0vfQzO1if8NgjEgb/3/v5XLCMDGMJTQtT3+xQntBpa7NTqE+om3ng80fcuOhHFl5 D7SA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 64si342507otx.50.2020.02.17.07.54.38; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:54:50 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729564AbgBQPyH (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 17 Feb 2020 10:54:07 -0500 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:60092 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729541AbgBQPyH (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Feb 2020 10:54:07 -0500 Received: from [5.158.153.52] (helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1j3iig-0000cX-MB; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:54:02 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 48519103A00; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:54:02 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Andy Lutomirski , Linus Torvalds Cc: Oleg Nesterov , Andrew Morton , Andy Lutomirski , Borislav Petkov , Ingo Molnar , Jan Kratochvil , Pedro Alves , Peter Anvin , Linux Kernel Mailing List , the arch/x86 maintainers Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] x86: fix get_nr_restart_syscall() In-Reply-To: References: <20191126110659.GA14042@redhat.com> <20191203141239.GA30688@redhat.com> <20191218151904.GA3127@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:54:02 +0100 Message-ID: <87v9o5nrad.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andy Lutomirski writes: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 12:02 PM Linus Torvalds > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 7:19 AM Oleg Nesterov wrote: >> > >> > Andy, Linus, do you have any objections? >> >> It's ok by me, no objections. I still don't love your "hide the bit in >> thread flags over return to user space", and would still prefer it in >> the restart block, but I don't care _that_ deeply. >> > > I'd rather stick it in restart_block. I'd also like to see the kernel > *verify* that the variant of restart_syscall() that's invoked is the > same as the variant that should be invoked. In my mind, very few > syscalls say "I can't believe there are no major bugs in here" like > restart_syscall(), and being conservative is nice. Just mopping up my backlog. What happened to this?