lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] coredump: wait on the core pattern umh at least once
    On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:01:44AM -0700, Scott James Remnant wrote:
    > On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
    >
    > > On 10/28, Scott James Remnant wrote:
    > > >
    > > > If a thread crashes as a result of a signal on the thread group leader
    > > > that signal can still be pending,
    > >
    > > No. do_coredump() clears TIF_SIGPENDING.
    > >
    > I'm definitely seeing cases where SIGTERM sent to the process group
    > that chrome is in results in one of chrome's thread's crashing (not
    > your concern, obviously), but at the point it enters this function
    > TIF_SIGPENDING is definitely set and the signal is SIGTERM.
    >
    > The SIGTERM is in the shared pending set.
    >
    > > I already tried to explain why this signal_pending() was added, but
    > > apparently I was not clear. I'll try again in the previous thread.
    > >
    > Could you add me to the Cc: of that thread?
    >
    > Scott
    >
    FWIW, this is the (huge) thread, and specific post that originated the change
    we're looking at:
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/98
    Neil



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-10-31 22:21    [W:0.022 / U:0.860 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site