Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Aug 2011 19:47:54 +0200 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 18/41] OpenRISC: Don't reimplement force_sigsegv() |
| |
On 08/16, Matt Fleming wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 18:49 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > And since force_sigsegv() drops > > the lock after setting SIG_DFL we can "race" with the sub-thread anyway. > > I did notice that race in force_sigsegv() too, is it a real problem?
Oh, I don't really know. I mean, I do not know if this really needs the fix.
OK, suppose that another thread does signal(SIGSEGV, SIG_IGN) in between. This probably means it asks for the problems anyway. and we can pretend this was done before this SIGSEGV was dequeued.
If it does signal(SIGSEGV, my_handler), then most probably force_sigsegv() will be called again soon, after dequeueing SIGSEGV.
Oleg.
| |