Re: 3.14-rc2 XFS backtrace because irqs_disabled.

[Al Viro]

On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 06:43:45PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > So basically we want a different condition for "can we just go ahead and
> > free that sucker", right?  Instead of "it's on the list, shan't free it"
> > it ought to be something like "it's on the list or it is referenced by
> > ksiginfo".  Locking will be interesting, though... ;-/
> 
> I guess yes... send_sigqueue() checks list_empty() too, probably nobody else.

The trouble being, we might end up with
	Q picked by collect_signal and and stuff into ksiginfo
	Q resubmitted by timer code
	Q picked by *another* thread into its ksiginfo
	the first thread finally done with signal
and at that point we still have a reference in the second thread's ksiginfo.
Hell knows - my first reflex in that kind of situation is to replace
that flag with refcount, so that timer code would hold a reference from
timer_create(2) to timer_delete(2), send_sigqueue() would bump it and
dismiss_siginfo() - drop the sucker.  But that means either grabbing
siglock in dismiss_siginfo() or making the counter atomic; either way
it's a cacheline ping-pong.  Atomic counter is less painful in that respect -
it would be right next to the list, so we dirty that cacheline anyway...

I'm still trying another approach (slightly bigger ksiginfo used to store
all variants with si_code >= 0), but it has messiness of its own; we'll
see how it goes...
--
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/