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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871w29s5u2.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date:	Fri, 04 Jul 2008 23:21:57 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Joe Peterson <joe@...rush.com>, Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de>,
	Török Edwin <edwintorok@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Ctrl+C doesn't interrupt process waiting for I/O

Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:

>> disk activity process over each time it completed), it always broke out
>> after one ^C - one time took an extra second or two.  Note that I did
>> not run latencytop (did not have it compiled in my kernel) - if that is
>> required for the test, let me know, but I assume it is just for
>> gathering info when the issue occurs.
>
> I really don't think this is tty related looking at the code involved and
> also the lack of actual measurements presented. More likely scheduler and
> VM related changes.

Why should the scheduler or VM behave differently for Ctrl-Z+kill 
versus Ctrl-C?

Doesn't make sense to me. And yes I see this here regularly and it started
at some point.

-Andi
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ