* Szabolcs Nagy <[email protected]> [2016-03-09 12:34:50 +0100]: > * Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> [2016-03-09 09:56:31 +0100]: > > Why is so much complexity added to avoid a ~3 instructions window where > > calcellation is tested? Cancellation at work atom boundaries is a > > fundamentally > > 'polling' model anyway, and signal delivery is asynchronous, with a > > fundamental > > IPI delay if it's cross-CPU. > > > > to avoid the race when the thread is cancelled after the test but before > the syscall see http://ewontfix.com/16/ > wrong link http://ewontfix.com/2/
- [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/32: Add AT_SYSINFO cancellation helpe... Andy Lutomirski
- Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/32: Add AT_SYSINFO cancellat... Ingo Molnar
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/32: Add AT_SY... Szabolcs Nagy
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/32: Add A... Szabolcs Nagy
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/32: Add A... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/32: A... Andy Lutomirski
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/... Ingo Molnar
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/32: A... Rich Felker
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/vdso/... Ingo Molnar
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/v... Rich Felker
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x... Ingo Molnar
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x... Rich Felker
- Re: [musl] Re: [RFC PATCH] x... Szabolcs Nagy

