From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: roland@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
"rjw@sisk.plpavel"@ucw.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] signal: don't notify parent if not stopping after tracehook_notify_jctl() in do_signal_stop()
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 15:46:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101126144654.GB28177@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1290768569-16224-5-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
On 11/26, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> do_signal_stop() tests sig->group_stop_count one more time after
> calling tracehook_notify_jctl() as it's allowed release siglock. If
> group_stop_count has changed to zero, it no longer stops but still
> notifies the parent.
Only if tracehook_notify_jctl() returns nonzero. That was the
point, tracehook_ can ask to notify even if we are not going to
stop.
> Also, tracehook_notify_jctl() doesn't release siglock, so, currently,
> none of these matters at all.
Yes. But with this patch it is not possible to drop siglock in
tracehook_notify_jctl().
> This doesn't cause any behavior difference as the condition never
> triggers in the current code.
I don't understand the motivation then (probably I should read
the next patches).
If we kill the ability to drop ->siglock in tracehook_notify_jctl(),
we can simplify the code further. No need to start with
->group_stop_count = 1 and then decrement it again.
We could do something like
static int do_signal_stop(int signr)
{
struct signal_struct *sig = current->signal;
int notify;
if (sig->group_stop_count) {
--sig->group_stop_count;
} else {
struct task_struct *t;
if (!likely(sig->flags & SIGNAL_STOP_DEQUEUED) ||
unlikely(signal_group_exit(sig)))
return 0;
/*
* There is no group stop already in progress.
* We must initiate one now.
*/
sig->group_exit_code = signr;
for (t = next_thread(current); t != current; t = next_thread(t))
/*
* Setting state to TASK_STOPPED for a group
* stop is always done with the siglock held,
* so this check has no races.
*/
if (!(t->flags & PF_EXITING) &&
!task_is_stopped_or_traced(t)) {
sig->group_stop_count++;
signal_wake_up(t, 0);
}
}
if (!sig->group_stop_count) {
sig->flags = SIGNAL_STOP_STOPPED;
current->exit_code = sig->group_exit_code;
__set_current_state(TASK_STOPPED);
notify = CLD_STOPPED;
}
spin_unlock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock);
if (notify || current->ptrace) {
read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
do_notify_parent_cldstop(current, notify);
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
}
/* Now we don't run again until woken by SIGCONT or SIGKILL */
schedule();
tracehook_finish_jctl();
current->exit_code = 0;
return 1;
}
In short, this patch dismisses tracehook_notify_jctl().
Roland?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-26 14:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-26 10:49 [PATCHSET RFC] ptrace,signal: sane interaction between ptrace and job control signals Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 01/14] signal: fix SIGCONT notification code Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 13:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-12-01 1:43 ` Roland McGrath
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 02/14] freezer: fix a race during freezing of TASK_STOPPED tasks Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 19:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-11-26 19:59 ` Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 03/14] freezer: remove superflous try_to_freeze() loop in do_signal_stop() Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 19:42 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 04/14] signal: don't notify parent if not stopping after tracehook_notify_jctl() " Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 14:46 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2010-11-26 15:04 ` Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 05/14] signal: fix premature completion of group stop when interfered by ptrace Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 15:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-26 16:03 ` Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 06/14] signal: use GROUP_STOP_PENDING to avoid stopping multiple times for a single group stop Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 17:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-26 18:39 ` Tejun Heo
2010-11-27 11:40 ` [PATCH UPDATED " Tejun Heo
2010-11-28 19:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-29 13:38 ` Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 07/14] ptrace: add @why to ptrace_stop() Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 08/14] ptrace: make do_signal_stop() use ptrace_stop() if the task is being ptraced Tejun Heo
2010-11-28 19:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-28 20:22 ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-11-28 20:53 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 09/14] ptrace: clean transitions between TASK_STOPPED and TRACED Tejun Heo
2010-11-28 20:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-28 20:51 ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-11-29 13:48 ` Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 10/14] ptrace: don't consume group count from ptrace_stop() Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 11/14] ptrace: make group stop notification reliable against ptrace Tejun Heo
2010-11-28 20:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-29 13:52 ` Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 12/14] ptrace: reorganize __ptrace_unlink() and ptrace_untrace() Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 13/14] ptrace: make SIGCONT notification reliable against ptrace Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:49 ` [PATCH 14/14] ptrace: remove the extra wake_up_process() from ptrace_detach() Tejun Heo
2010-11-28 20:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-29 13:55 ` Tejun Heo
2010-11-26 10:55 ` [PATCHSET RFC] ptrace,signal: sane interaction between ptrace and job control signals Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101126144654.GB28177@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc="rjw@sisk.plpavel"@ucw.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome