[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 3.1.0-rc4-tip 26/26] uprobes: queue signals while thread is singlestepping.
    * Oleg Nesterov <> [2011-10-05 20:01:39]:

    > Srikar, I am still reading this series, need more time to read this
    > patch, but:


    > On 09/27, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
    > >
    > > I did a rethink and implemented this patch a little differently using
    > > block_all_signals, unblock_all_signals. This wouldnt need the
    > > #ifdeffery + no changes in kernel/signal.c
    > No, Please don't. block_all_signals() must be killed. This interface
    > simply do not work. At all. It is buggy as hell. I guess I should ping
    > David Airlie again.

    I could use sigprocmask instead of block_all_signals.

    The patch (that I sent out as part of v5 patchset) uses per task
    pending sigqueue and start queueing the signals when the task
    singlesteps. After completion of singlestep, walks thro the pending

    But I was thinking if I should block signals instead of queueing them in
    a different sigqueue. So Idea is to block signals just before the task
    enables singlestep and unblock after task disables singlestep.

    Instead of using block_all_signals, I could use sigprocmask to achieve
    the same.

    Which approach do you suggest or do you have any other approach to look

    Thanks and Regards

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-10-06 08:07    [W:0.020 / U:0.208 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site