[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100413193201.GA18835@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:32:01 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Raistlin <raistlin@...ux.it>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Darren Hart <darren@...art.com>,
Henrik Austad <henrik@...tad.us>,
Johan Eker <johan.eker@...csson.com>,
"p.faure" <p.faure@...tech.ch>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Claudio Scordino <claudio@...dence.eu.com>,
michael trimarchi <trimarchi@...is.sssup.it>,
Fabio Checconi <fabio@...dalf.sssup.it>,
Tommaso Cucinotta <t.cucinotta@...up.it>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>,
Nicola Manica <nicola.manica@...il.com>,
Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 08/11] sched: send SIGXCPU at -deadline task
overruns.
On 04/13, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 20:24 +0100, Raistlin wrote:
> >
> > +#define dl_se_signal(se, s, msg) \
> > + do { \
> > + struct task_struct *t = dl_task_of(se); \
> > + sigaddset(&t->pending.signal, s); \
> > + set_tsk_thread_flag(t, TIF_SIGPENDING); \
> > + printk(KERN_INFO msg "in %d (%s)\n", task_pid_nr(t), t->comm); \
> > + } while (0)
> > +
Without ->siglock?
This is racy even if dl_task_of(se) == current, but I guess it can
be !current. For example, we must never set TIF_SIGPENDING without
wake_up_state(). A fatal signal should kill the whole process, etc.
Even sigaddset() itself can race with tkill, it is not atomic.
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