[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1182554371.24740.87.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 09:19:31 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fix signalfd interaction with thread-private signals
On Sat, 2007-06-23 at 09:16 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 15:47 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Quite frankly, it strikes me that if we want to do this, then we shouldn't
> > save the _process_ information at all, we should save the "sighand"
> > instead.
> >
> > So either we save the process info, or we save the sighand, but saving the
> > "group_leader" seems totally bogus. Especially as the group leader can
> > change (by execve()).
> >
> > One thing that strikes me as I look at that function is that the whole
> > signalfd thing doesn't seem to do any reference counting. Ie it looks
> > totally buggy wrt passing the resulting fd off to somebody else, and then
> > exiting in the original process.
> >
> > What did I miss?
>
> Probably nothing... doesn't look good. What are the lifetime rules of a
> struct sighand tho ?
Ah got it, signalfd_detach() in include/linux/signalfd.h from
exit_signal plus some rcu bits in signalfd lock/unlock.
Ben.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists