[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:0.195 / U:2.872 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site