Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] posix-timers: Prefer delivery of signals to the current thread

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 04/03, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> The test if fragile as hell as there is absolutely no guarantee that the
> signal target distribution is as expected. The expectation is based on a
> statistical assumption which does not really hold.

Agreed. I too never liked this test-case.

I forgot everything about this patch and test-case, I can't really read
your patch right now (sorry), so I am sure I missed something, but

>  static void *distribution_thread(void *arg)
>  {
> -	while (__atomic_load_n(&remain, __ATOMIC_RELAXED));
> -	return NULL;
> +	while (__atomic_load_n(&remain, __ATOMIC_RELAXED) && !done) {
> +		if (got_signal)
> +			usleep(10);
> +	}
> +
> +	return (void *)got_signal;
>  }

Why distribution_thread() can't simply exit if got_signal != 0 ?

See https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230128195641.GA14906@xxxxxxxxxx/

Oleg.