From: Markus Pargmann <mpa@pengutronix.de>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, balbi@ti.com, dwmw2@infradead.org,
tj@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + signal-turn-dequeue_signal_lock-into-kernel_dequeue_signal.patch added to -mm tree
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 22:09:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151024200918.GB16521@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151024194826.GA14895@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2143 bytes --]
Hi Oleg,
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 09:48:26PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Hi Markus,
>
> s/mm-commits/lkml/
>
> On 10/24, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:19:27PM -0700, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote:
> > >
> > > Subject: signal: turn dequeue_signal_lock() into kernel_dequeue_signal()
> > >
> > > 1. Rename dequeue_signal_lock() to kernel_dequeue_signal(). This
> > > matches another "for kthreads only" kernel_sigaction() helper.
> > >
> > > 2. Remove the "tsk" and "mask" arguments, they are always current
> > > and current->blocked. And it is simply wrong if tsk != current.
> > >
> > > 3. We could also remove the 3rd "siginfo_t *info" arg but it looks
> > > potentially useful. However we can simplify the callers if we
> > > change kernel_dequeue_signal() to accept info => NULL.
> > >
> > > 4. Remove _irqsave, it is never called from atomic context.
> >
> > I just realised that this patch will conflict with a fixup patch for nbd
> > that will be included in rc7.
> >
> > dcc909d90ccd (nbd: Add locking for tasks)
> >
> > I think there is basically one new instance of dequeue_signal_lock() that
> > needs to be replaced with kernel_dequeue_signal().
>
> Thanks! I'll send *-fix.patch to Andrew.
>
> But you know, dcc909d90ccd (nbd: Add locking for tasks) doesn't look exactly
> right at first glance, although I need to re-check tomorrow...
In which regard? Is the locking incorrect or am I doing something wrong
with the signal handling?
>
> One question, can sock_xmit() be called from user space? Or it is only called
> by kthreads?
sock_xmit() can be called by a thread that entered from userspace. In
general the idea is that there are no pending signals when it leaves
into userspace again.
Best Regards,
Markus
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-24 20:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <5612e95f.di8YWOS7lWDxbMSm%akpm@linux-foundation.org>
[not found] ` <20151024191053.GA16521@pengutronix.de>
2015-10-24 19:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-10-24 20:09 ` Markus Pargmann [this message]
2015-10-25 13:27 ` 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=20151024200918.GB16521@pengutronix.de \
--to=mpa@pengutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.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®