lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/6] signal: sigprocmask() should do retarget_shared_pending()
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:21:37 +0200
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> 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.

Agreed.

> @@ -2131,6 +2131,11 @@ int sigprocmask(int how, sigset_t *set,
> }
>
> spin_lock_irq(&tsk->sighand->siglock);
> + if (signal_pending(tsk) && !thread_group_empty(tsk)) {
> + sigset_t not_newblocked;
> + signorsets(&not_newblocked, &current->blocked, &newset);
> + retarget_shared_pending(tsk, &not_newblocked);
> + }
> tsk->blocked = newset;
> recalc_sigpending();
> spin_unlock_irq(&tsk->sighand->siglock);

Oh man, that took me a while to understand.

So we're only retargetting the signals that we just blocked? That makes
sense but would you mind adding a comment?

--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-04-12 14:11    [W:0.098 / U:1.584 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site