mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	codonell <codonell@redhat.com>, Eduard Benes <ebenes@redhat.com>,
	Karel Srot <ksrot@redhat.com>, Matt Newsome <mnewsome@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] tty: disassociate_ctty() sends the extra SIGCONT
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 20:34:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130921183436.GA13418@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5238BDEC.1070400@hurleysoftware.com>

Peter, sorry for delay, I was sick.

On 09/17, Peter Hurley wrote:
>
> On 09/15/2013 11:50 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
>> Put the "!on_exit" check back to restore the old behaviour.
>>
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v3.10+
>> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
>> Reported-by: Karel Srot <ksrot@redhat.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>

Thanks!

Can I ask the question? tty_signal_session_leader() is probably fine,
but it _looks_ buggy or at least confusing to me.

		do_each_pid_task(tty->session, PIDTYPE_SID, p) {
			spin_lock_irq(&p->sighand->siglock);
			if (p->signal->tty == tty) {
				p->signal->tty = NULL;
				/* We defer the dereferences outside fo
				   the tasklist lock */
				refs++;
			}
			if (!p->signal->leader) {
				spin_unlock_irq(&p->sighand->siglock);
				continue;
			}
			__group_send_sig_info(SIGHUP, SEND_SIG_PRIV, p);
			__group_send_sig_info(SIGCONT, SEND_SIG_PRIV, p);
			put_pid(p->signal->tty_old_pgrp);  /* A noop */
			spin_lock(&tty->ctrl_lock);
			tty_pgrp = get_pid(tty->pgrp);

I guess this can happen only once, so we could even add WARN_ON(tty_pgrp)
before get_pid(). But this look confusing, as if we can do get_pid()
multiple times and leak tty->pgrp.

			if (tty->pgrp)
				p->signal->tty_old_pgrp = get_pid(tty->pgrp);

else? We already did put_pid(tty_old_pgrp), we should clear it.

IOW, do you think the patch below makes sense or I missed something?
Just curious.

Oleg.

--- x/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
+++ x/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
@@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int tty_signal_session_leader(str
 {
 	struct task_struct *p;
 	int refs = 0;
-	struct pid *tty_pgrp = NULL;
+	struct pid *tty_pgrp = tty_get_pgrp(tty);
 
 	read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
 	if (tty->session) {
@@ -560,18 +560,12 @@ static int tty_signal_session_leader(str
 				   the tasklist lock */
 				refs++;
 			}
-			if (!p->signal->leader) {
-				spin_unlock_irq(&p->sighand->siglock);
-				continue;
+			if (p->signal->leader) {
+				__group_send_sig_info(SIGHUP, SEND_SIG_PRIV, p);
+				__group_send_sig_info(SIGCONT, SEND_SIG_PRIV, p);
+				put_pid(p->signal->tty_old_pgrp);  /* A noop */
+				p->signal->tty_old_pgrp = get_pid(tty_pgrp);
 			}
-			__group_send_sig_info(SIGHUP, SEND_SIG_PRIV, p);
-			__group_send_sig_info(SIGCONT, SEND_SIG_PRIV, p);
-			put_pid(p->signal->tty_old_pgrp);  /* A noop */
-			spin_lock(&tty->ctrl_lock);
-			tty_pgrp = get_pid(tty->pgrp);
-			if (tty->pgrp)
-				p->signal->tty_old_pgrp = get_pid(tty->pgrp);
-			spin_unlock(&tty->ctrl_lock);
 			spin_unlock_irq(&p->sighand->siglock);
 		} while_each_pid_task(tty->session, PIDTYPE_SID, p);
 	}


  reply	other threads:[~2013-09-21 18:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-15 15:50 [PATCH 0/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-15 15:50 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-16 22:16   ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-17 19:41     ` Carlos O'Donell
2013-09-17 20:30       ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-17 20:39   ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-21 18:34     ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2013-09-21 20:25       ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-22 20:03         ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 18:18           ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-25 16:21 ` v3.10 breaks T.tcflush (Was: tty: disassociate_ctty() sends the extra SIGCONT) Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-25 17:56   ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-26  0:06   ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-26  0:13     ` [PATCH] tty: Fix SIGTTOU not sent with tcflush() Peter Hurley
2013-09-26  0:24       ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-09-26 16:36       ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-26 19:10         ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-26 21:18           ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-27  5:19           ` Karel Srot

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=20130921183436.GA13418@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=codonell@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebenes@redhat.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
    --cc=ksrot@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mnewsome@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
    --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