Re: [PATCH v5] kernel/signal: Signal-based pre-coredump notification

[Enke Chen <enkechen@cisco.com>]

Hi, Andrew:

On 11/21/18 4:37 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 17:46:29 +0100 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/29, Enke Chen wrote:
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
>>
>> Hmm. I didn't say this ;)
>>
>> But OK, feel free to keep this tag.
>>
>> I do not like this feauture.
> 
> Why is that?
> 
>> But I see no technical problems in this version
>> and I never pretented I understand the user-space needs, so I won't argue.
> 
> The changelog appears to spell this all out quite well?  Unusually
> well, in my experience ;)

I also followed up with a little more explanation in the email thread on
10/30/2018:

---
As I explained earlier, the primary application is in the area of network
high-availability / non-stop-forwarding where early fault notification and
early action can help maintain BFD sessions and thus avoid unnecessary
disruption to forwarding while the control-plane is recovering.
---

BTW, I probably should have pointed out this earlier:

BFD stands for "RFC 5880: Bi-directional forwarding detection".

> 
> A couple of things...
> 
> - We'll be looking for a manpage update please.  (Search MAINTAINERS
>   for "manpage")

Yes, I will submit a manpage update.  Most of the text is already
written in the patch description.

> 
> - As it's a linux-specific feature, a test under
>   tools/testing/selftests would be appropriate.  I don't know how much
>   that work will be. 

The selftest code was submitted on 10/25/2018:

   [PATCH] selftests/prctl: selftest for pre-coredump signal notification

> Do we have other linux-specific signal extensions which could piggyback onto that?

No. There are enough existing signals that an application can choose for this
purpose, such as SIGUSR1, SIGUSR1, and any of the RT signals.

Thanks.  -- Enke