Re: [PATCH] coredump: wait on the core pattern umh at least once

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 10/29, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On 10/28, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > >
> > > If a thread crashes as a result of a signal on the thread group leader
> > > that signal can still be pending,
> >
> > No. do_coredump() clears TIF_SIGPENDING.
> >
> I'm definitely seeing cases where SIGTERM sent to the process group
> that chrome is in results in one of chrome's thread's crashing (not
> your concern, obviously), but at the point it enters this function

which function? wait_for_dump_helpers?

> TIF_SIGPENDING is definitely set and the signal is SIGTERM.

Yes, this is possible. But not as result of a signal which triggers
the coredumping. And once again, this clear_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING)
is simply wrong (I mean, not enough).

> > I already tried to explain why this signal_pending() was added, but
> > apparently I was not clear. I'll try again in the previous thread.
> >
> Could you add me to the Cc: of that thread?

I thought you were cc'ed ;) Sorry, I didn't realiaze that these 2
threads are totally separate. Please look at

	http://marc.info/?t=131959137800005

and at
	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=131989970411759

in particular.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/