On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 2:07 PM Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 at 11:54, Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Document the circumstances under which refcount_t's saturation mechanism
> > works deterministically.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I /think/ the main point of Kees's suggestion was that FUTEX_TID_MASK
> is UAPI, so unlikely to change.
Yeah, but it has already changed three times in git history:
76b81e2b0e224 ("[PATCH] lightweight robust futexes updates 2"):
0x1fffffff -> 0x3fffffff
d0aa7a70bf03b ("futex_requeue_pi optimization"): 0x3fffffff -> 0x0fffffff
bd197234b0a6 ("Revert "futex_requeue_pi optimization""): 0x0fffffff ->
0x3fffffff
I just sent a patch to fix up a comment that still claimed the mask
was 0x1fffffff... so I didn't want to explicitly write the new value
here.
While making the value *bigger* would probably be a bit hard (and
unnecessary), making it smaller would be fairly easy here - the field
is populated by userspace, so even though the mask is 0x3fffffff,
userspace will never set the upper bits, so they're effectively
reserved bits with value 0.
