On 06/12/21(Mon) 14:58, Scott Cheloha wrote: > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 08:35:15PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2021 18:01:04 -0600 > > > From: Scott Cheloha <scottchel...@gmail.com> > > > > > > Two things in sys_kbind() need an explicit kernel lock. First, > > > sigexit(). Second, uvm_map_extract(), because the following call > > > chain panics without it: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > With this committed we can unlock kbind(2). > > > > > > Thoughts? ok? > > > > To be honest, I don't think this makes sense unless you can make the > > "normal" code path lock free. You're replacing a single > > KERNEL_LOCK/UNLOCK pair with (potentially) a bunch of them. That may > > actually make things worse. So I think we need to make > > uvm_map_extract() mpsafe first. > > Unlocking uvm_map_extract() would improve things, yes.
Yes, please. What's missing?
