Re: 3.14-rc2 XFS backtrace because irqs_disabled.

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 04:16:24PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > All of these have in common that they try to handle signals in a kernel
> > thread (which we don't even allow by default), and that they ignore the
> > siginfo.  I think they could mostly be replaced by an addition to the
> > kthread API to allow a kthread to be killed by signals for legacy
> > reasons.
> 
> FWIW, there's a funny situation - all users of dequeue_signal_lock()
> actually ignore info completely.  I'm not saying that we ought to
> stop returning it, but e.g. jbd part of that patch is simply

Might aswell stick the discmiss into what was dequeue_signal_lock().
Which at that point should get a saner name (maybe thread_dequeue_signal ?)
and lose all argument except maybe task_struct - not that it's
nessecary, but it would mirror the other functions usually used around
it.

--
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/