From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] signalfd: add ability to choose a private or shared queue Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 18:05:40 +0100 Message-ID: <20121224170540.GB9553@redhat.com> References: <1356336807-5517-1-git-send-email-avagin@openvz.org> <1356336807-5517-4-git-send-email-avagin@openvz.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, criu@openvz.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro , "Paul E. McKenney" , David Howells , Thomas Gleixner , Michael Kerrisk , Pavel Emelyanov , Cyrill Gorcunov To: Andrey Vagin Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1356336807-5517-4-git-send-email-avagin@openvz.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On 12/24, Andrey Vagin wrote: > > static ssize_t signalfd_dequeue(struct signalfd_ctx *ctx, siginfo_t *info, > - int nonblock) > + int nonblock, int queue) > { > ssize_t ret; > DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current); > > spin_lock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock); > - ret = dequeue_signal(current, &ctx->sigmask, info); > + ret = do_dequeue_signal(current, &ctx->sigmask, info, queue); Hmm. queue != 0 && !nonblock ? And in this case you should also update signalfd_poll(). > + if (file->f_flags & SFD_GROUP) > + queue++; > + > + if (file->f_flags & SFD_PRIVATE) > + queue--; To be honest, personally I think this looks ugly. If you add an argumemt to dequeue_signal() it would be better to use bitmask. But this is minor. Well. Perhaps we can avoid all these complications? IIUC, all you need is to know if the dequeued signal is private or shared. Since you add SFD_RAW anyway perhaps we can report this fact instead? This doesn't need any changes in signal.c, signalfd_dequeue() can easily know which queue dequeue_signal() will use. Oleg.