lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/6] relax sig_needs_tasklist()
From
Date
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> writes:

> handle_stop_signal() does not need tasklist_lock for
> SIG_KERNEL_STOP_MASK signals anymore.

Small question.

If I read the code correctly the only thing handle_stop_signal needs
the tasklist_lock for is to protect task->parent, for the
do_notify_parent_cldstop(...) case.

If this is correct. I think I see a path to kill read_lock(&tasklist_lock)
completely.

- Protect task->parent with the rcu_read_lock && task_lock().
- Use the rcu forms of list_add/list_del on the tasklist.
- replace read_lock(&tasklist_lock) with rcu_read_lock().
- Make tasklist_lock a simple spin lock.

Comments?

Eric
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-25 17:21    [W:0.066 / U:0.624 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site