[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AF4D908CC0E2A24EB308A26962C8C3BDEB16E6@DGGEMI530-MBX.china.huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 14:13:00 +0000
From: weizhenliang <weizhenliang@...wei.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC: "ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"colona@...sta.com" <colona@...sta.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"christian@...uner.io" <christian@...uner.io>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"deepa.kernel@...il.com" <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] signal: trace_signal_deliver when signal_group_exit
On 04/23, Oleg wrote:
>On 04/23, weizhenliang wrote:
>>
>> Last time Oleg suggested using SIG_DFL as the third parameter, but its type is 'void (*)(int)', but not expected 'struct k_sigaction *'.
>
>Yes I misread the signature of TRACE_EVENT(signal_deliver), and I thought you at least compiled the kernel with your patch applied ;)
>
>> How about
>> trace_signal_deliver(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_NOINFO, &sighand->action[signr
>> - 1]); ?
>
>sure, this should fix the problem.
Sorry about that, I will pay more attention to it in the future.
And thanks for your reply, I will re-adjust the patch later.
Wei.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists