[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110512154019.GB18599@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 17:40:19 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: 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 08/11] ptrace: move fallback JOBCTL_TRAPPING clearing
to get_signal_to_deliver()
On 05/11, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 05:48:34PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 05/08, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Move the fallback clearing to the end of get_signal_to_deliver() so
> > > that TRAPPING is maintained while tracee is inside signal delivery
> > > path. When killed, tracee is guaranteed to leave signal delivery path
> > > in finite amount of time and thus TRAPPING is still guaranteed to be
> > > cleared on kill.
> >
> > Mostly yes, but we can race with freeze_processes() and deadlock.
>
> Ah... the try_to_freeze(). Nice spotting. It isn't necessarily a
> deadlock tho.
Yes, it is not "fatal" for the system.
> I
> think the right thing to do here is making the TRAPPING sleep an
> interruptible one and let the syscall restart logic deal with it.
Oh, yes, we can. But this adds more complications again. We can fix
this particular problem simpler. Say, freezer_do_not_count(). There
are other options afaics.
> * Make TRAPPING wait INTERRUPTIBLE.
I am starting to strongly dislike TRAPPING outside of do_signal_stop().
> * Move clearing of pending group stop and traps to the actions which
> require such clearing.
Not sure this is enough. OTOH, perhaps this is unnneeded.
I'll write another email to explain what I mean.
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