Re: [PATCH -mm 1/2]: PM: Fix handling of stopped tasks

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

Hi,

On Saturday, 9 December 2006 00:36, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > I wonder if we should start a test suite ;-).
> > > > 
> > > > > This means, however, that with this patch the behavior of a process (gdb)
> > > > > after the resume may be different to its normal behavior, which is wrong.
> > > > 
> > > > Yep.
> > 
> > Okay, I think I know what to do so that it works.  The above symptoms are not
> > present with the appended patch.
> 
> Looks good to me. Thanks for you work!

Well, there's still a race possible in there, if SIGCONT comes after we have
forced the SIGSTOP and before we call signal_wake_up().

I think we should force the SIGSTOP and call signal_wake_up() without
releasing the lock.  I'll try to do something along these lines later today.

Greetings,
Rafael


-- 
If you don't have the time to read,
you don't have the time or the tools to write.
		- Stephen King

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV