lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: JFFS2 swsusp / signal cleanup.
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 06:11:55PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Is flush_signals() really so stupid to do? Goal was to make
> modifications to code as simple as possible, and as most pieces do not
> expect to be interrupted, pretending signal never happened seems like
> good idea...

What if that signal was necessary for the operation of the thread, and
dropping it would cause a problem?

Since you're effectively using signal handling to cause a false pending
signal indication, surely the correct cleanup is to re-calculate the
pending signal indication. That way, we won't be throwing away signals.

I'm also wondering if there could be a problem with (ab)using TASK_STOPPED
here - could a stopped task be woken prematurely and thereby sent spinning
in refrigerator() by a non-stopped process sending a SIGCONT at just the
right time?

Maybe we want a TASK_FROZEN state to describe the "frozen, may not be woken
by anything except thawing" state?

--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/
2.6 Serial core
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [W:2.153 / U:1.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site