----- On Jan 12, 2022, at 11:00 AM, Florian Weimer fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra: > >> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 04:16:36PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >> >>> You could perhaps push a signal frame onto the stack. It's going to >>> be expensive, but it's already in the context switch path, so maybe it >>> does not matter. >> >> Please no! Signals are a trainwreck that need change (see the whole >> AVX-512 / AMX saga), we shouldn't use more of that just cause. > > If it's a signal, it should be modeled as such. I think it's pretty > close to a synchronous signal. Florian, just to validate here: is your argument about AVX-512/AMX or about rseq abort-at-ip ? Am I understanding correctly that you would prefer that the kernel push an entire signal frame onto the stack rather than just push the abort-at-ip value on abort ? If it is the case, are there advantages in doing so ? Tooling support ? Thanks, Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
