lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/41] signal: Use set_current_blocked()
On 08/16, Matt Fleming wrote:
>
> Did you want me to send just the updated
> versions of patches or the entire series again? It would seem over the
> top to send the entire series.

This is up to you. Just in case, feel free to add my acked-by or
reviewed-by to any patch I didn't comment explicitly. Or may be

> Also, are you going to pull these patches into your tree and send them
> to Linus or would it be better to route them through -mm?

This is the question ;)

I simply do not know what should we do. I think this should be
routed via maintainers.

Or I can push this into the poor ptrace branch... but I am
thinking with horror about the possible conflicts in arch/ code...

What do you think?



Damn. And I can't relax. This is very minor, but I still think
it would be nice to have a common helper which plays sa_mask /
SA_NODEFER to set ->blocked. But in this case, you probably need
to resend the whole series ;)

I mean something like the patch below. OK, nevermind. Probably
this factorization doesn't buy too much, but it will complicate
the merging.

Oleg.

--- x/include/linux/signal.h
+++ x/include/linux/signal.h
@@ -254,6 +254,7 @@ extern void set_current_blocked(const si
extern int show_unhandled_signals;

extern int get_signal_to_deliver(siginfo_t *info, struct k_sigaction *return_ka, struct pt_regs *regs, void *cookie);
+extern void xxx(struct k_sigaction *ka);
extern void exit_signals(struct task_struct *tsk);

extern struct kmem_cache *sighand_cachep;
--- x/kernel/signal.c
+++ x/kernel/signal.c
@@ -2314,6 +2314,16 @@ relock:
return signr;
}

+void xxx(struct k_sigaction *ka)
+{
+ sigset_t blocked;
+
+ sigorsets(&blocked, &current->blocked, &ka->sa.sa_mask);
+ if (!(ka->sa.sa_flags & SA_NODEFER))
+ sigaddset(&blocked, sig);
+ set_current_blocked(&blocked);
+}
+
/*
* It could be that complete_signal() picked us to notify about the
* group-wide signal. Other threads should be notified now to take
--- x/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
+++ x/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
@@ -682,7 +682,6 @@ static int
handle_signal(unsigned long sig, siginfo_t *info, struct k_sigaction *ka,
struct pt_regs *regs)
{
- sigset_t blocked;
int ret;

/* Are we from a system call? */
@@ -733,14 +732,10 @@ handle_signal(unsigned long sig, siginfo
*/
regs->flags &= ~X86_EFLAGS_TF;

- sigorsets(&blocked, &current->blocked, &ka->sa.sa_mask);
- if (!(ka->sa.sa_flags & SA_NODEFER))
- sigaddset(&blocked, sig);
- set_current_blocked(&blocked);
+ xxx(ka);

tracehook_signal_handler(sig, info, ka, regs,
test_thread_flag(TIF_SINGLESTEP));
-
return 0;
}



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-17 19:07    [W:0.111 / U:9.244 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site