Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Signal scalability series

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Tue Oct 04 2011 - 13:33:55 EST

On 10/04, Matt Fleming wrote:
> Ah, I think it was these lines that confused me into thinking
> ->ctrl_lock wasn't required around PF_EXITING,
> void exit_signals(struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
> int group_stop = 0;
> sigset_t unblocked;
> if (thread_group_empty(tsk) || signal_group_exit(tsk->signal)) {
> tsk->flags |= PF_EXITING;
> return;
> }
> But I guess that's safe because either we're the only thread in the
> group or the group is already going to exit?

Yes. Except s/exit/exit or exec/.

And this reminds me... This is not exactly right. I do not mean
this particular function, but the whole logic. An execing process
can miss SIGSTOP. Or the coredumping signal.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at