From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] will_become_orphaned_pgrp: we have threads
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2007 08:45:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m14perooqx.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071209142116.GB131@tv-sign.ru> (Oleg Nesterov's message of "Sun, 9 Dec 2007 17:21:16 +0300")
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> writes:
> On 12/08, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> writes:
>>
>> > p->exit_state != 0 doesn't mean this process is dead, it may have
> sub-threads.
>> >
>> > However, the new "p->exit_state && thread_group_empty(p)" check is not
> correct
>> > either, this is just the temporary hack. Perhaps we can just remove this
> check,
>> > but I don't understand orphaned process groups magic. At all. However, I
> think
>> > exit_notify() is obviously and completely wrong wrt this helper.
>>
>> The problem that orphaned processes groups address is what happens if
>> an entire process group is stopped, and there is not a process that
>> can wake them up.
>>
>> The rule for an unprivileged process sending a signal to a process
>> group is that it must be in the same session as the process group.
>>
>> The rule for sending a signal to a process group is that the signal sender
>> must be in the same session.
>>
>> So we are testing for a process group that does not have a living
>> member with a parent outside of the process that can send the process
>> group a signal.
>
> Ah, thanks a lot Eric, I am _starting_ to understand this.
>
>> Oleg what do you see wrong with checking p->exit_state &&
>> thread_group_empty(p)? Since non-leader threads all self reap
>> that seems to be a valid test for an dead thread group.
>
> There is a window when exit_notify() drops tasklist and before release_task().
> Suppose the last (non-leader) thread exits. This means that entire group exits,
> but thread_group_empty() is not true.
And if you are an observer this is important.
Equally messed up is a our status in /proc at that point. Which
says our sleeping process is a zombie.
I'm thinking we need to do at least some of the thread group leadership
transfer in do_exit, instead of de_thread. Then p->group_leader->exit_state
would be sufficient to see if the entire thread group was alive,
as the group_leader would be whoever was left alive. The original
group_leader might still need to be kept around for it's pid...
I think that would solve most of the problems you have with a dead
thread group leader and sending SIG_STOP as well.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-09 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-08 18:38 [PATCH 1/3] will_become_orphaned_pgrp: we have threads Oleg Nesterov
2007-12-08 23:50 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-12-09 14:21 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-12-09 15:45 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2007-12-09 16:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-12-09 23:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-12-10 18:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-12-11 1:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m14perooqx.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.