Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1291446

Re: [PATCH] sched/wait: Fix the signal handling fix

Show all headers | View raw

Peter, sorry. I didn't actually read this patch yet (and a lot of previous
emails). Will try tomorrow, I am not even sure I understand the problem(s)
correctly. But let me ask one question anyway,

On 12/13, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/wait.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/wait.c
> @@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ __wait_on_bit(wait_queue_head_t *wq, str
>  	do {
>  		prepare_to_wait(wq, &q->wait, mode);
>  		if (test_bit(q->key.bit_nr, q->key.flags))
> -			ret = (*action)(&q->key);
> +			ret = (*action)(&q->key, mode);

And every action() should check signal_pending_state()...

So why we can't change __wait_on_bit/etc instead and remove all the signal-
pending checks from the callbacks? It seems that we can just check
signal_pending_state() before prepare_to_wait(). Or perhaps we can add
another helper which acts like prepare_to_wait_event().

Yes, some callers want -EINTR, some -ERESTARTSYS, but this shouldn't be a
problem.

And sorry if this was already discussed, another case when I am trying to
return to lkml with a lot of unread emails.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH] sched/wait: Fix the signal handling fix Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-12-13 22:20 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] sched/wait: Fix the signal handling fix Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-12-14 19:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] sched/wait: Fix the signal handling fix Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-12-14 22:20 +0100

csiph-web