[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110323170236.GF12003@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:02:36 +0100
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: roland@...hat.com, jan.kratochvil@...hat.com,
vda.linux@...glemail.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
indan@....nu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] job control: Don't set group_stop exit_code if
re-entering job control stop
Hey,
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 05:40:14PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Hmmm... There are two competing signals in that case - SIGTTIN sent by
> > the parent and SIGSTOP sent by someone else.
>
> "someone else" can be PTRACE_CONT(SIGSTOP) from the debugger.
The debugger should be doing PTRACE_CONT(notified_signo). Am I
missing something? Anyways, this doesn't really matter. I kinda like
just testing STOP_STOPPED both in stop initiation and notification
paths but well it's no biggie either way.
> > Okay, I see. Maybe we should discern between traced for group stop
> > from other traps but then again given the group stop re-entering while
> > ptraced it can be considered a relatively consistent behavior. Yeah,
> > but probably better to remove the double reporting.
>
> Yes. I have a vague feeling a new GROUP_STOP_YES_I_AM_STOPPED can
> be useful anyway. It should be set by task_participate_group_stop()
> if the task participates. We will see.
Yeah, agreed. Let's mark it and ensure that a task doesn't stop for
group stop back-to-back.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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