[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] signal: do_sigtimedwait() needs retarget_shared_pending()

    On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 06:01:15PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
    > > Maybe it would be a good idea to introduce a new helper which checks /
    > > enforces that the operation indeed is only unblocking?
    > I hope nobody will change ->blocked directly, except this function
    > and force_sig_info(). And daemonize/allow_signal/disallow_signal, but
    > there are special and probably we can already kill this deprecated
    > block/unblock code and forbid kernel_thread(CLONE_SIGHAND) + daemonize().
    > In fact I think daemonize() should go away.
    > So, I don't really think we need another helper to unblock something.

    Oh I see. I thought there would be quite a number of places
    unblocking directly. If that's not the case, it's fine with me.

    > > Also, it can
    > > be a pure preference but I think _locked suffix is better / more
    > > common for APIs which expect the caller to be responsible for locking.
    > Again, I can rename... Cough, but in this case please simply suggest
    > another name. set_tsk_blocked_locked?

    Oooh, blocked_locked, didn't see that one coming. Maybe
    set_tsk_sigmask() and set_tsk_sigmask_locked()? I prefer sigmask to
    blocked anyway, so...



     \ /
      Last update: 2011-04-25 18:31    [W:0.062 / U:15.368 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site