From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com, roland@redhat.com, bastian@waldi.eu.org,
daniel@hozac.com, xemul@openvz.org, containers@lists.osdl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6][v5] Protect cinit from blocked fatal signals
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:16:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090105151608.GE3313@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081227205409.GD27337@us.ibm.com>
On 12/27, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>
> + * Container-init gets no signals it doesn't want from same
> + * container.
> */
> - if (unlikely(signal->flags & SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE) &&
> - !signal_group_exit(signal))
> + if ((signal->flags & SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE) &&
> + !sig_kernel_only(signr))
minor, but why did you remove unlikely() ?
And could you improve the changelog a bit? Please explain
that !signal_group_exit() was needed to handle the case
when the mt init does exit/exec and sends SIGKILL to all
sub-threads. Now this is covered by sig_kernel_only().
In short, please explain that if SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE task
sees the sig_kernel_only() signal here, then it was either
sent by the parent namespace or it was generated internally.
In both cases we should not drop it.
But your current changelog mostly explains why do we need
another SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE check in get_signal_to_deliver(),
this is orthogonal to the change itself.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-05 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-27 20:46 [PATCH 0/6][v5]: Container-init signal semantics Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2008-12-27 20:49 ` [PATCH 1/6][v5] Remove 'handler' parameter to tracehook functions Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2008-12-27 20:51 ` [PATCH 2/6][v5] Protect init from unwanted signals more Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2008-12-27 20:52 ` [PATCH 3/6][v5] Define siginfo_from_ancestor_ns() Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2008-12-31 0:12 ` Roland McGrath
2009-01-05 12:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-05 14:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-12-27 20:53 ` [PATCH 4/6][v5] Protect cinit from unblocked SIG_DFL signals Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2008-12-31 0:19 ` Roland McGrath
2009-01-05 13:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-12-27 20:54 ` [PATCH 5/6][v5] Protect cinit from blocked fatal signals Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2009-01-05 15:16 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2008-12-27 20:55 ` [PATCH 6/6][v5] SI_USER: Masquerade si_pid when crossing pid ns boundary Sukadev Bhattiprolu
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=20090105151608.GE3313@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=bastian@waldi.eu.org \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=daniel@hozac.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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