On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 04:34:02PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 03:10:18PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 19:32:20 +0200
> > Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Now, task_work_run() is in the exit_to_user_mode_loop() which is notably
> > > > *before* exit_to_user_mode() which does the unwind_reset_info().
> > > > 
> > > > What happens if we get an NMI requesting an unwind after
> > > > unwind_reset_info() while still very much being in the kernel on the way
> > > > out?  
> > > 
> > > AFAICT it will try and do a task_work_add(TWA_RESUME) from NMI context,
> > > and this will fail horribly.
> > > 
> > > If you do something like:
> > > 
> > >   twa_mode = in_nmi() ? TWA_NMI_CURRENT : TWA_RESUME;
> > >   task_work_add(foo, twa_mode);
> > > 
> > > it might actually work.
> > 
> > Ah, the comment for TWA_RESUME didn't express this restriction.
> > 
> > That does look like that would work as the way I expected task_work to
> > handle this case.
> 
> BTW, I remember Peter had a fix for TWA_NMI_CURRENT, I guess it got lost
> in the shuffle or did something else happen in the meantime?
> 
>   
> https://lore.kernel.org/[email protected]

Oh, yeah, I had completely forgotten about all that :-)

I'll go stick it in the pile. Thanks!

Reply via email to