From: Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Nikita V. Youshchenko" <nyoushchenko@mvista.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] x86: signal: handle_signal() should use sigprocmask()
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:15:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110412131543.231659d2@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110411172201.GF32469@redhat.com>
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:22:01 +0200
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> This is ugly, but if sigprocmask() needs retarget_shared_pending() then
> handle signal should follow this logic. In theory it is newer correct to
^^^ never
> add the new signals to current->blocked, the signal handler can sleep/etc
> so we should notify other threads in case we block the pending signal and
> nobody else has TIF_SIGPENDING.
>
> Of course, this change doesn't make signals faster :/
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@linux.intel.com>
I guess all assigments to current->blocked need auditing now? Forcing
everything through sigprocmask() seems worthwhile to me.
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-12 12:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-11 17:19 [RFC PATCH 0/6] signal: sigprocmask fixes Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-11 17:20 ` [PATCH 1/6] signal: introduce retarget_shared_pending() Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-12 11:39 ` Matt Fleming
2011-04-11 17:20 ` [PATCH 2/6] signal: retarget_shared_pending: consider shared/unblocked signals only Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-12 11:40 ` Matt Fleming
2011-04-12 19:53 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-11 17:21 ` [PATCH 3/6] signal: sigprocmask: narrow the scope of ->sigloc Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-12 11:38 ` Matt Fleming
2011-04-11 17:21 ` [PATCH 4/6] signal: sigprocmask() should do retarget_shared_pending() Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-12 12:07 ` Matt Fleming
2011-04-12 14:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-14 19:36 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-12 18:33 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-14 20:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-14 20:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-11 17:22 ` [PATCH 5/6] x86: signal: handle_signal() should use sigprocmask() Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-12 12:15 ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2011-04-11 17:22 ` [PATCH 6/6] x86: signal: sys_rt_sigreturn() " Oleg Nesterov
2011-04-12 12:17 ` Matt Fleming
2011-04-14 20:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=20110412131543.231659d2@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=matt@console-pimps.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nyoushchenko@mvista.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®