linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/5] signalfd v2

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703081712590.3670@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date:	Thu, 8 Mar 2007 17:16:21 -0800 (PST)
From:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...o.co.il>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/5] signalfd v2 - signalfd core ...

On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> Ugh. Still can't understand, probably I missed something or misread this patch.
> 
> If we shift signalfd_notify() from specific_send_sig_info/__group_send_sig_info
> to send_signal(), we have the same "list_empty()" fastpath if no signalfds are
> attached to the sighand. The difference is that we don't count sig_ignored()
> signals, which looks right to me.

Now I shifted the check into send_signal(), since signalfd now uses the 
standard dequeue_signal, and hence compete with standard signal delivery 
against the queue. This was initial Linus design.




- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/