[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080517151347.GA9476@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 19:13:47 +0400
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Austin Clements <amdragon+kernelbugzilla@....edu>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] posix timers: sigqueue_free: don't free sigqueue if it is queued
On 05/03, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Sat, 3 May 2008, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Note: I am not sure we shouldn't do the opposite, free sigqueue + cancel the
> > pending signal, but this needs some ugly changes. Perhaps we should reconsider
> > this change later. See also http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10460
>
> You know what, I think there might be an even simple solution.
>
> How about just setting a bit saying it is canceled
Yes, good idea, I'll send the patch in a minute.
But now I see I didn't read your message to the end,
> - and nothing more.
> Then, the dequeue logic can be just taught to ignore those things.
Unless I missed something again, "nothing more" can't work. We still
need this patch (re-sended). We still need to free sigqueue if it is
not queued, and we must not dequeue it if it is queued - otherwise we
will free it along with the new "canceled" bit.
Oleg.
--
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