Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     x86@kernel.org, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        "H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 03/10] x86: Introduce userspace API to handle per-thread
 features
In-Reply-To: <20220511022751.65540-5-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
References: <20220511022751.65540-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20220511022751.65540-5-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 May 2022 14:02:50 +0200
Message-ID: <87o803vtzp.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 11 2022 at 05:27, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> Add three new arch_prctl() handles:
>  
> +static long thread_feature_prctl(struct task_struct *task, int option,
> +				 unsigned long features)

Bah. I really hate the task pointer on all these x86 prctls. @task must
always be current, so this @task argument is just confusion.

> +{
> +	const unsigned long known_features = 0;
> +
> +	if (features & ~known_features)
> +		return -EINVAL;

This implementation allows to task->read features_[locked] with
@features == 0. That should be documented somewhere.

> +	if (option == ARCH_THREAD_FEATURE_LOCK) {
> +		task->thread.features_locked |= features;
> +		return task->thread.features_locked;
> +	}


> +	/* Do not allow to change locked features */
> +	if (features & task->thread.features_locked)
> +		return -EPERM;
> +
> +	if (option == ARCH_THREAD_FEATURE_DISABLE) {
> +		task->thread.features &= ~features;
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Handle ARCH_THREAD_FEATURE_ENABLE */
> +
> +	task->thread.features |= features;
> +out:
> +	return task->thread.features;

Eyes bleed.

	if (option == ARCH_THREAD_FEATURE_ENABLE)
        	task->thread.features |= features;
        else
        	task->thread.features &= ~features;

	return task->thread.features;

It's bloody obvious from the code that the counterpart of enable is
disable, no? So neither the goto nor the 'comment the obvious' is useful
in any way.

Thanks,

        tglx