Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f347:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d7csp5077029pxu; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:19:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzJVBZWw+Ag2N75LaIlQYzw9/JZ3HJ1LMMNNODd2vptsP16BARjO3c1RXO802EhvdKxtcOQ X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:687:: with SMTP id f7mr8536648edy.314.1607631548807; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:19:08 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1607631548; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=KV3XDIwaOB96RpkSQTpk4H8rqUDuqRR/bwXN5ViTmkLUvzFCqxdEJP/YctIIGiMzUW 8krkAPw5/Dxby3dz7ClgT6mPVKDtPQ6fx6sngwI+nXQ3vyHAM6+O7ewNq//ZZO3PwGXF i9t9IBYod7q0Ti2rfSAjzEp865gXfcsOpfOFZRj/Y/qMtkdJ6enA+UPTB+7G6j8Z202/ sNiYrVKp191dOozd6I7uexYDDAiZfDnwLGPEM266igLqKJx5PAmTDs+G/NqP/ZtEsbOM 7OihReWPPesQP1L6jOUhD/iwuAj2Gw/dwHzP9+mTLUa6DsRwpiHSUYvcQ2acvZGZjZ5W rOyA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:subject:mime-version:user-agent:message-id :in-reply-to:date:references:cc:to:from; bh=5OaqzItvKJlclzAqyUPcsHSW/r6lvdxMYi2KS+gz6R4=; b=g0m0jbo5ibJ1JMMMiBRt/AwS4dAjsBkSh7SxYK5u6ZxUI8izD1sHnK+mj0Wxjd2sut OHzCrfkFFFbgz1Uxa/l8bC8LfETqZdTOw+MAaDYncumo8wGSI8Qirr2XLP0xVH04yVmx rVnmxnbBwyXLRHxy3bhoW0n2qFze+HAPaWJyN9d5sNTk2ZJSxZY8MOe5PntqtnzQJvx2 4YrdHPQklY8PbTTiTcXW1qhPlusB/But5JzSNdYcF8898PXLIsXYsWz6xj4tmwIC5QQ0 M8lLTlPmMDEpcRkmaULmSvJHsugTRgyLTGKdSbTW4JtCvJI1uDNyl44N629kTGMJju8+ lVTA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=xmission.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id r9si3161039ejc.144.2020.12.10.12.18.45; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:19:08 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=xmission.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390492AbgLJUNu (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:13:50 -0500 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:33572 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732879AbgLJTmv (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Dec 2020 14:42:51 -0500 Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out03.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1knRop-006yDH-4C; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:41:39 -0700 Received: from ip68-227-160-95.om.om.cox.net ([68.227.160.95] helo=x220.xmission.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1knRoo-0000LM-7f; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:41:38 -0700 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Davidlohr Bueso Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , Bernd Edlinger , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ingo Molnar , Will Deacon , Jann Horn , Vasiliy Kulikov , Al Viro , Oleg Nesterov , Cyrill Gorcunov , Sargun Dhillon , Christian Brauner , Arnd Bergmann , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Waiman Long References: <87ft4mbqen.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <875z5h4b7a.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20201207090953.GF3040@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20201208083412.GR2414@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20201210183849.fdgcagdn4pyghtfn@linux-p48b> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 13:40:58 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20201210183849.fdgcagdn4pyghtfn@linux-p48b> (Davidlohr Bueso's message of "Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:38:49 -0800") Message-ID: <87r1nxmotx.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1knRoo-0000LM-7f;;;mid=<87r1nxmotx.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=68.227.160.95;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX18ruw/fWoR4wfy7LMN2DCQ9CCMYZQv0YpQ= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on sa07.xmission.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.0 required=8.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_50, DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE,TR_XM_SB_Phish,T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG,XMSubLong, XMSubPhish11 autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.4997] * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa07 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 1.5 XMSubPhish11 Phishy Language Subject * 0.0 TR_XM_SB_Phish Phishing flag in subject of message X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa07 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: **;Davidlohr Bueso X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 607 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.13 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 12 (1.9%), b_tie_ro: 9 (1.6%), parse: 1.79 (0.3%), extract_message_metadata: 19 (3.1%), get_uri_detail_list: 1.15 (0.2%), tests_pri_-1000: 10 (1.6%), tests_pri_-950: 1.92 (0.3%), tests_pri_-900: 1.59 (0.3%), tests_pri_-90: 298 (49.1%), check_bayes: 289 (47.6%), b_tokenize: 9 (1.5%), b_tok_get_all: 7 (1.1%), b_comp_prob: 2.3 (0.4%), b_tok_touch_all: 267 (44.0%), b_finish: 1.02 (0.2%), tests_pri_0: 203 (33.4%), check_dkim_signature: 0.69 (0.1%), check_dkim_adsp: 2.8 (0.5%), poll_dns_idle: 0.93 (0.2%), tests_pri_10: 2.3 (0.4%), tests_pri_500: 53 (8.7%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Break deadlock involving exec_update_mutex X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Davidlohr Bueso writes: > On Tue, 08 Dec 2020, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >>I suppose I'll queue the below into tip/perf/core for next merge window, >>unless you want it in a hurry? > > I'm thinking we'd still want Eric's series on top of this for the reader > benefits of the lock. We will see shortly what happens when the various branches all make it into linux-next. The two changes don't conflict in principle so it should not be a problem. Eric