[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110513172117.GA30243@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 19:21:17 +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 09/11] job control: reorganize wait_task_stopped()
Hi,
On 05/13, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 08:33:26PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > At first glance, do_wait() does
> >
> > wait_task_stopped();
> > wait_task_continued();
> >
> > and the state can be changed CONTINIUED -> STOPPED in between, right?
> > Or something else?
>
> Yeah and exit transitions too.
I am not sure... but probably this depends on definition.
We already checked ->exit_state != ZOMBIE, and we are holding tasklist.
The child can't exit. I mean, it can't change its ->exit_state.
However, SIGKILL can clear SIGNAL_STOP_STOPPED, and we can "miss" it.
But this looks correct, the child is no longer stopped but it is still
not dead. So I think in this case wait(WNOHANG | WEXITED | WSTOPPED)
can fail, notabug.
OTOH, perhaps SIGKILL should set SIGNAL_STOP_CONTINUED in this case?
And keep it if it was already set.
> There simply is no synchronization
> there. We can probably solve it without acquiring siglock by adding
> "clear this before making state transitions" flag followed by a mb()
perhaps even simpler if ->EXIT transition is fine.
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