[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1182561347.2735.14.camel@entropy>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:15:47 -0700
From: Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fix signalfd interaction with thread-private signals
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 17:12 -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Nicholas Miell wrote:
>
> > You could just get rid of the process/sighand/whatever reference
> > entirely and just make reads on a signalfd always dequeue signals for
> > the current thread.
>
> Duh?! ...
>
> > You'd lose the ability to pass signalfds around to other processes, but
> > I'm not convinced that is even useful. (But I'm sure somebody smarter
> > than me has a valid use case and would love to share :-)
>
> Wasn't it you that bitched (just a few days ago) because multiple threads
> could not use the same signalfd and they (by your initial thought) had to
> create one per thread?
Nevermind, I wasn't entirely clear on the reason why signalfd_ctx had a
tsk pointer. (I wrongly thought it was a vestige of the mechanism for
the original delivery semantics.)
--
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>
-
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