From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:48:16 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807101824150.2936@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080711005243.ADE90154218@magilla.localdomain>
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> i386 has never behaved this way, and still doesn't.
Btw, I told you differently, you didn't believe me. So I went back just
because I have an ego easily the size of Manhattan, and when you doubt me,
my ego is hurt.
i386 _has_ very much behaved this way. The system call code literally used
to do
..
cmpl $0,sigpending(%ebx)
jne signal_return
..
and then 'signal_return' case would handle one signal and then return to
user space:
..
call SYMBOL_NAME(do_signal)
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
GET_CURRENT(%ebx)
#endif
cli
CHECK_SOFTIRQ
je restore_all
..
ie it would call "restore_all" without re-checking signals. I wasn't
hallucinating.
So that's really old code.
The _really_ ancient code (like a decade ago or more) used to actually
loop in do_signal() generating multiple signal stacks in one go. Then, a
long long time ago, that was actually removed, and we expressly only tried
to queue one signal at a time. I do not remember why, but it was before
2.4.0. Probably _long_ before, but it's so long ago my memory is
unreliable.
The "queue multiple signals" code that you claim has always been there is
in fact pretty recent. For x86-32, it was a thing introduced in commit
c3ff8ec31c1249d268cd11390649768a12bec1b9: by _you_, just three years ago,
in 2.6.14, in regular git times.
So the x86-64 behaviour actually matches what the x86-32 behavior was at
the time before things split.
And I'd also like to point out another commit, namely "[PATCH] fix broken
vm86 interrupt/signal handling" (4031ff388138b58e5cd472dccce38828bcb8c706)
that fixed a bug with an endless loop you had introduced in that original
x86-32 code when you fixed this exact same issue back when.
Heh. That's the kind of thing that worries me.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-11 1:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-10 21:50 Roland McGrath
2008-07-10 22:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-10 22:42 ` Roland McGrath
2008-07-10 22:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-10 23:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 0:52 ` Roland McGrath
2008-07-11 1:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 1:27 ` Roland McGrath
2008-07-11 1:48 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2008-07-11 2:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 2:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 2:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-12 12:24 ` Andi Kleen
2008-07-11 5:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-11 11:13 ` Török Edwin
2008-07-11 12:24 ` Elias Oltmanns
2008-07-11 17:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 18:07 ` Roland McGrath
2008-07-11 18:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 18:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 18:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 22:53 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-07-12 10:33 ` Török Edwin
2008-07-11 20:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 23:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-12 10:32 ` Török Edwin
2008-07-12 13:42 ` Török Edwin
2008-07-12 14:55 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-07-12 18:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-12 18:15 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-07-12 18:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-12 17:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-12 20:26 ` Török Edwin
2008-07-12 20:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-12 20:57 ` Denys Vlasenko
2008-07-13 10:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-07-13 12:34 ` Denys Vlasenko
2008-07-13 18:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-13 18:45 ` Peter T. Breuer
2008-07-12 12:27 ` Andi Kleen
2008-07-12 17:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-13 9:38 ` Andi Kleen
2008-07-13 17:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-13 18:59 ` Andi Kleen
2008-07-13 19:08 ` Linus Torvalds
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=alpine.LFD.1.10.0807101824150.2936@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®