[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0712051704590.6288@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:08:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix group stop with exit race
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> do_signal_stop() counts all sub-thread and sets ->group_stop_count accordingly.
> Every thread should decrement ->group_stop_count and stop, the last one should
> notify the parent.
>
> However a sub-thread can exit before it notices the signal_pending(), or it may
> be somewhere in do_exit() already. In that case the group stop never finishes
> properly.
>
> Note: this is a minimal fix, we can add some optimizations later. Say we can
> return quickly if thread_group_empty(). Also, we can move some signal related
> code from exit_notify() to exit_signals().
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Looks OK for me, even though we're doing more work on the exit path. OTOH
I don't see a non-racy way of doing it w/out grabbing the lock. Did you
try to bench how much this change costs?
Anyway, looks sane to me...
Acked-by: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists