Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] signals: Always place SIGCONT and SIGSTOP on'shared_pending'

From: Matt Fleming
Date: Mon Apr 11 2011 - 15:24:19 EST

On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:50:05 +0200
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Sorry for delay again. I'll try to read the rest of this series
> tomorrow, I can no longer look at signal.c to today.

No problem.

> Oh, these changes do not look trivial. I must admit, I am a bit
> sceptical, but this is only my first impression based on amount on
> changes and more complex locking.

Yeah, the locking is more complex and I suspect that because I'm
dropping this patch the next iteration might become even more complex.
However, I definitely think the complexity is worth it because of how
much better signal delivery scales with these patches.

If you find anything that you think is overly complex I'm sure I could
clean it up with either comments or refactoring the code.

Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
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