[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210312161148.GA25946@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 17:11:51 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 3/3] signal: Allow tasks to cache one sigqueue struct
On 03/11, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> @@ -456,7 +460,12 @@ static void __sigqueue_free(struct sigqu
> return;
> if (atomic_dec_and_test(&q->user->sigpending))
> free_uid(q->user);
> - kmem_cache_free(sigqueue_cachep, q);
> +
> + /* Cache one sigqueue per task */
> + if (!current->sigqueue_cache)
> + current->sigqueue_cache = q;
> + else
> + kmem_cache_free(sigqueue_cachep, q);
> }
This doesn't look right, note that __exit_signal() does
flush_sigqueue(&sig->shared_pending) at the end, after exit_task_sighand()
was already called.
I'd suggest to not add the new exit_task_sighand() helper and simply free
current->sigqueue_cache at the end of __exit_signal().
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists