On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 02:00:26PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > This; how is getting preempted fundamentally different from scheduling > > ourselves? > > The difference is because getting preempted in the sequence above is > triggered off the back of an interrupt. On arm64, and I think also on x86, > the user access state (SMAP or PAN) is saved and restored across exceptions > but not across context switch. Consequently, taking an irq in a > user_access_{begin,end} section and then scheduling is fine, but calling > schedule directly within such a section is not.
So how's this then: if (user_access_begin()) { preempt_disable(); <IRQ> set_need_resched(); </IRQ no preempt> preempt_enable() __schedule(); user_access_end(); } That _should_ work just fine but explodes with the proposed nonsense.