[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 5/7] signal: sigprocmask() should do retarget_shared_pending()
    On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 15:45:57 +0200
    Oleg Nesterov <> wrote:

    > In short, almost every changing of current->blocked is wrong, or at least
    > can lead to the unexpected results.
    > For example. Two threads T1 and T2, T1 sleeps in sigtimedwait/pause/etc.
    > kill(tgid, SIG) can pick T2 for TIF_SIGPENDING. If T2 calls sigprocmask()
    > and blocks SIG before it notices the pending signal, nobody else can handle
    > this pending shared signal.
    > I am not sure this is bug, but at least this looks strange imho. T1 should
    > not sleep forever, there is a signal which should wake it up.
    > This patch moves the code which actually changes ->blocked into the new
    > helper, set_current_blocked() and changes this code to call
    > retarget_shared_pending() as exit_signals() does. We should only care about
    > the signals we just blocked, we use "newset & ~current->blocked" as a mask.
    > We do not check !sigisemptyset(newblocked), retarget_shared_pending() is
    > cheap unless mask & shared_pending.
    > Note: for this particular case we could simply change sigprocmask() to
    > return -EINTR if signal_pending(), but then we should change other callers
    > and, more importantly, if we need this fix then set_current_blocked() will
    > have more callers and some of them can't restart. See the next patch as a
    > random example.
    > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <>

    This looks much simpler to me.

    Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <>

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-04-22 14:49    [W:0.025 / U:9.848 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site