Re: [PATCH RFC] sched: introduce add_wait_queue_exclusive_head

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Wed Mar 19 2014 - 13:34:34 EST

On 03/19, Peng Tao wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Firtsly, cfs_block_sigs/cfs_block_sigsinv/etc are not exactly right,
> > they need set_current_blocked(). And you can read "old" lockless.
> >
> It seems that set_current_blocked() is not exported. Can we ask to export it?

Why not. If you are going to change this code to use set_current_blocked(),
I'd suggest you to send the "export set_current_blocked" patch in series.
Otherwise, if it is sent separately, your change will depend on another

Or you can use sigprocmask(). Actually it should die, but this won't happen
soon and it is already exported.

> And looking at other similar places like coda_block_signals(),

Yes, it can have much more users.

But note that set_current_blocked() can't help you to really block
SIGKILL anyway.

Could you explain why __l_wait_event() can't use TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE
instead of cfs_block_sigsinv(0) ?


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