From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 21:08:25 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070628170825.GA549@tv-sign.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a781481a0706280844l7eec6067gd576d88619463fe9@mail.gmail.com>
On 06/28, Satyam Sharma wrote:
>
> Second, we *must* break that tcp_recvmsg() inside the kthread's
> main loop, of course! We want it stopped, after all, and if we don't
> make it "break" out of that function, the kthread _will_never_exit_.
In that case this kthread is buggy. We have sock->sk_rcvtimeo.
> Please note that this
> whole thing is about functions that will _simply_*never*_exit_ever_
> _unless_ given a signal.
ditto. kthread should not do this.
OK, I suggest to stop this thread. I don't claim you are wrong, just
we think differently ;)
> >This is what I can't understand completely. Why should we check SIGKILL
> >or signal_pending() in addition to kthread_stop_info.k, what is the point?
>
> ... so kthread_stop_info will go away too.
it should go away regardless, we have patches. Still I see no point
to check signal_pending() in kthread_stop().
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-28 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20070605152340.f09fa6f2.jlayton@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20070606085550.GA7351@infradead.org>
2007-06-08 16:35 ` [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled Jeff Layton
2007-06-09 1:30 ` Herbert Xu
2007-06-09 11:08 ` Jeff Layton
2007-06-25 19:41 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-25 19:52 ` Jeff Layton
2007-06-25 22:09 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-26 0:46 ` Jeff Layton
2007-06-26 11:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-06-26 22:53 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-27 1:29 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-27 12:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-06-28 0:44 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-28 14:12 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-06-28 15:44 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-28 16:19 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-28 16:24 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-28 17:08 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2007-06-28 18:41 ` Jeff Layton
2007-06-28 19:22 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-06-21 14:35 ` [linux-cifs-client] Re: [PATCH] CIFS: make cifsd (more) signal-safe Jeff Layton
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=20070628170825.GA549@tv-sign.ru \
--to=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=satyam.sharma@gmail.com \
/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