linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/scheduler: Don't call wait_event

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180430152941.GA10583@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:29:41 +0200
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     Christian König 
        <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Andrey Grodzovsky <Andrey.Grodzovsky@....com>,
        David.Panariti@....com, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alexander.Deucher@....com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Christian.Koenig@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/scheduler: Don't call wait_event_killable for
 signaled process.

On 04/30, Christian König wrote:
>
> Well when the process is killed we don't care about correctness any more, we
> just want to get rid of it as quickly as possible (OOM situation etc...).

OK,

> But it is perfectly possible that a process submits some render commands and
> then calls exit() or terminates because of a SIGTERM, SIGINT etc..

This doesn't differ from SIGKILL. I mean, any unhandled fatal signal translates
to SIGKILL and I think this is fine.

but this doesn't really matter,

> So what we essentially need is to distinct between a SIGKILL (which means
> stop processing as soon as possible) and any other reason because then we
> don't want to annoy the user with garbage on the screen (even if it's just
> for a few milliseconds).

For what?

OK, I see another email from Andrey, I'll reply to that email...

Oleg.