[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20091113235333.0E3CC15E8@magilla.sf.frob.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:53:33 -0800 (PST)
From: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
systemtap <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
DLE <dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 3/3] Add get_signal tracepoint
This is orthogonal to the core-dump tracepoint, I don't see why you
call them a unified patch series.
The proper name for this event is "signal delivery". But since the
proper name for "send_signal" is "signal generation", I suppose "get"
is analogously improper to the existing "send" tracepoint. ;-)
Especially if you call this "get" rather than "deliver", there is
another place that should invoke this tracepoint (or perhaps a third
one). sys_rt_sigtimedwait "gets" a signal without delivering it. In
POSIX terminology this is called "accepting" the signal: the three
things that can happen in the life of a signal are "generate",
"deliver", and "accept". If you are trying to match up what happened to
a signal generated by kill() or whatnot, then you want to notice both
delivery and acceptance as the complementary event.
(And again I have no clue why this signal stuff should be called
"sched" at all.)
Thanks,
Roland
--
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