On 10/9/20 2:01 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote: > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > >> On 10/05, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> The goal is this patch series is to decouple TWA_SIGNAL based task_work >>> from real signals and signal delivery. >> >> I think TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL can have more users. Say, we can move >> try_to_freeze() from get_signal() to tracehook_notify_signal(), kill >> fake_signal_wake_up(), and remove freezing() from recalc_sigpending(). >> >> Probably the same for TIF_PATCH_PENDING, klp_send_signals() can use >> set_notify_signal() rather than signal_wake_up(). > > Yes, that was my impression from the patch set too, when I accidentally > noticed it. > > Jens, could you CC our live patching ML when you submit v4, please? It > would be a nice cleanup. Definitely, though it'd be v5 at this point. But we really need to get all archs supporting TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL first. Once we have that, there's a whole slew of cleanups that'll fall out naturally: - Removal of JOBCTL_TASK_WORK - Removal of special path for TWA_SIGNAL in task_work - TIF_PATCH_PENDING can be converted and then removed - try_to_freeze() cleanup that Oleg mentioned And probably more I'm not thinking of right now :-) -- Jens Axboe
