Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-166291-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 12:14:11 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: =?utf-8?B?QW5kcsOp?= Almeida <andrealmeid@igalia.com>, 
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, 
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, 
	David.Laight@aculab.com, carlos@redhat.com, Peter Oskolkov <posk@posk.io>, 
	Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander@mihalicyn.com>, Chris Kennelly <ckennelly@google.com>, 
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>, 
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, 
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>, 
	Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>, longman@redhat.com, kernel-dev@igalia.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] Add FUTEX_SPIN operation
Message-ID: <20240502-sporen-pirschen-039688cd9efe@brauner>
References: <20240425204332.221162-1-andrealmeid@igalia.com>
 <20240426-gaumen-zweibeinig-3490b06e86c2@brauner>
 <f052ff72-72c9-4b83-9285-2cd9d52e5f72@igalia.com>
 <20240502-gezeichnet-besonderen-d277879cd669@brauner>
 <8734r0o81v.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8734r0o81v.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>

On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 11:51:56AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Christian Brauner:
> 
> > Unless I'm missing something the question here is PID (as in TGID aka
> > thread-group leader id gotten via getpid()) vs TID (thread specific id
> > gotten via gettid()). You want the thread-specific id as you want to
> > interact with the futex state of a specific thread not the thread-group
> > leader.
> >
> > Aside from that TIDs are subject to the same race conditions that PIDs
> > are. They are allocated from the same pool (see alloc_pid()).
> 
> For most mutex types (but not robust mutexes), it is undefined in
> userspace if a thread exits while it has locked a mutex.  Such a usage
> condition would ensure that the race doesn't happen, I believe.

The argument is a bit shaky imho because the race not being able to
happen is predicated on no one being careless enough to exit with a
mutex held. That doesn't do anything against someone doing it on
purpose.

> 
> From a glibc perspective, we typically cannot use long-term file
> descriptors (that are kept open across function calls) because some
> applications do not expect them, or even close them behind our back.

Yeah, good point. Note, I suggested it as an extension not as a
replacement for the TID. I still think it would be a useful extension in
general.