[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 18/41] OpenRISC: Don't reimplement force_sigsegv()
On 08/16, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 18:49 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > And since force_sigsegv() drops
> > the lock after setting SIG_DFL we can "race" with the sub-thread anyway.
> I did notice that race in force_sigsegv() too, is it a real problem?

Oh, I don't really know. I mean, I do not know if this really needs
the fix.

OK, suppose that another thread does signal(SIGSEGV, SIG_IGN) in
between. This probably means it asks for the problems anyway. and
we can pretend this was done before this SIGSEGV was dequeued.

If it does signal(SIGSEGV, my_handler), then most probably
force_sigsegv() will be called again soon, after dequeueing SIGSEGV.


 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-18 19:53    [W:0.114 / U:0.384 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site