[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130223194125.GB9405@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 20:41:25 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
adurbin@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] freezer: clear fake signal on exit from
__refrigerator
On 02/20, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>
> I think we need something like this in order to be able to fix
> wait_event_freezable and friends. Here is one idea:
>
> #define __wait_event_freezable(wq, condition, ret) \
> do { \
> DEFINE_WAIT(__wait); \
> \
> for (;;) { \
> prepare_to_wait(&wq, &__wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); \
> if (condition) \
> break; \
> if (!signal_pending(current)) { \
> freezable_schedule();
...
> If you cleaned up the fake signal in __refrigerator()
Perhaps. Or we can add recalc_sigpending into wait_freezable().
But note that
if (!signal_pending(current))
freezable_schedule();
is not actually right, wait_event_freezable() should be interruptible,
but not by freezer.
And let me repeat, as for coredump this can only solve the problems in
wait_for_dump_handler(). As for other users, I simply do not see any
valid user today, so perhaps wait_event_freezable() should die... Or
I missed something.
I'll try to make the coredumping fixes tomorrow, then we discuss this
again.
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