Re: PF_USER_WORKERs and shadow stack

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 08/13, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> On 8/13/25 09:28, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > But it seems that if a features_enabled(ARCH_SHSTK_SHSTK) thread creates a
> > PF_USER_WORKER thread, shstk_alloc_thread_stack() will allocate the shadow
> > stack for no reason.
>
> Is this costing us anything other than some CPU cycles and 160 bytes of
> memory for a VMA?

Well, I guess no, but I do have another reason for "something-like-this" cleanup.
I am working on other changes which should eliminate x86_task_fpu(PF_USER_WORKER).
Hopefully I'll send the patches tomorrow. To remind, see
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250812125700.GA11290@xxxxxxxxxx/

So I'd like to ensure that ssp_active() can't return T in ssp_get().


And... Dave, I understand that it is very easy to criticize someone else's code ;)
But - if I am right - the current logic doesn't look clean to me. Regardless.

Oleg.