[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20241022112222.1edeeac3aee13714a53c217c@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:22:22 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Liao Chang <liaochang1@...wei.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com,
mhiramat@...nel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uprobes: Remove redundant spinlock in
uprobe_deny_signal
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:12:32 +0200
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 07/31, Liao Chang wrote:
> >
> > --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > @@ -1979,9 +1979,7 @@ bool uprobe_deny_signal(void)
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(utask->state != UTASK_SSTEP);
> >
> > if (task_sigpending(t)) {
> > - spin_lock_irq(&t->sighand->siglock);
> > clear_tsk_thread_flag(t, TIF_SIGPENDING);
> > - spin_unlock_irq(&t->sighand->siglock);
>
> Agreed, in this case ->siglock buys nothing, another signal can come
> right after spin_unlock().
>
> Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
>
>
Looks good to me.
Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Peter, can you pick this?
Thanks,
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists