linux-next.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ptrace tree with the s390 tree
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 16:49:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110722144907.GA7408@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110722080600.GE2622@htj.dyndns.org>

On 07/22, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Yeah, it looks like a proper mess.

Yes.

> It seems ptrace left too much for
> archs to decide.  Events to be reported should be defined by generic
> ptrace code

I agree very much. Right now I am not sure if it really makes sense
to avoid the SIGTRAP signals, but in any case I think that at least
we need the generic ptrace_sigtrap(si_code, ...) helper which hides
all details.

And note that force_sig*() we use currently is wrong in this case,
it removes SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE.

And we should also cleanup the force_* mess. Also, it would be
nice to remove the "task_struct *t" argument, force_sig_info()
should be only used for synchronous signals. Afaics, only oom
killer really needs force_sig_info() with t != current. And this
reminds me, we need send_sigkill().

Oleg.

      parent reply	other threads:[~2011-07-22 14:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-20  5:33 linux-next: manual merge of the ptrace tree with the s390 tree Stephen Rothwell
2011-07-21  8:02 ` Tejun Heo
2011-07-21 14:44   ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-07-22  8:06     ` Tejun Heo
2011-07-22  8:29       ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-07-22  8:48         ` Tejun Heo
2011-07-22 14:49       ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]

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=20110722144907.GA7408@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).