Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:40:45 +0900 | From | KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] signals: introduce send_sigkill() helper |
| |
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 03:00:23 +0200 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> Cleanup, no functional changes. > > There are a lot of buggy SIGKILL users in kernel. For example, almost > every force_sig(SIGKILL) is wrong. force_sig() is not safe, it assumes > that the task has the valid ->sighand, and in general it should be used > only for synchronous signals. send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 1) or > send_xxx(SEND_SIG_FORCED/SEND_SIG_PRIV) is not right too but this is not > immediately obvious. > > The only way to correctly send SIGKILL is send_sig_info(SEND_SIG_NOINFO) > but we do not want to use this directly, because we can optimize this > case later. For example, zap_pid_ns_processes() allocates sigqueue for > each process in namespace, this is unneeded. > > Introduce the trivial send_sigkill() helper on top of send_sig_info() > and change zap_pid_ns_processes() as an example. > > Note: we need more cleanups here, this is only the first change. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
| |