From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Naohiro Ooiwa <nooiwa@miraclelinux.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>,
roland@redhat.com, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
oleg@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] show message when exceeded rlimit of pending signals
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 01:57:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091031015708.1307aea5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AEBFA46.8070709@miraclelinux.com>
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:50:14 +0900 Naohiro Ooiwa <nooiwa@miraclelinux.com> wrote:
> Naohiro Ooiwa wrote:
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> >> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:36:31 +0900
> >> Naohiro Ooiwa <nooiwa@miraclelinux.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> +static void show_reach_rlimit_sigpending(void)
> >>> +{
> >>> + if (!printk_ratelimit())
> >>> + return;
> >> printk_ratelimit() is a bad thing and we should be working toward
> >> removing it altogether, not adding new callers.
> >>
> >> Because it uses global state. So if subsystem A is trying to generate
> >> lots of printk's, subsystem B's important message might get
> >> accidentally suppressed.
> >>
> >> It's better to use DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE() and __ratelimit() directly.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for your advices.
> > And I was glad to talk to you in Japan Linux Symposium.
> >
> > I got it, now that you mention it.
> > I will fix my patch.
> >
> >>> + printk(KERN_INFO "%s/%d: reached the limit of pending signals.\n",
> >>> + current->comm, current->pid);
> >> I suggest that this be
> >>
> >> "reached RLIMIT_SIGPENDING"
> >>
> >> because RLIMIT_SIGPENDING is a well-understood term and concept.
> >>
> >
> > OK, I see.
>
> I fixed my patch.
> Could you please check it.
>
Please always include the full changelog and signoff with each
iteration of a patch. That changelog might of course need updating as
the patch changes.
> ---
> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 11 +++++++++--
> kernel/signal.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 9107b38..3bbd92f 100644
> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2032,8 +2032,15 @@ and is between 256 and 4096 characters. It is defined in
> the file
>
> print-fatal-signals=
> [KNL] debug: print fatal signals
> - print-fatal-signals=1: print segfault info to
> - the kernel console.
> +
> + If enabled, warn about various signal handling
> + related application anomalies: too many signals,
> + too many POSIX.1 timers, fatal signals causing a
> + coredump - etc.
> +
> + If you hit the warning due to signal overflow,
> + you might want to try "ulimit -i unlimited".
> +
> default: off.
>
> printk.time= Show timing data prefixed to each printk message line
> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> index 6705320..624a626 100644
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -41,6 +41,8 @@
>
> static struct kmem_cache *sigqueue_cachep;
>
> +int print_fatal_signals __read_mostly;
> +
> static void __user *sig_handler(struct task_struct *t, int sig)
> {
> return t->sighand->action[sig - 1].sa.sa_handler;
> @@ -188,6 +190,17 @@ int next_signal(struct sigpending *pending, sigset_t *mask)
> return sig;
> }
>
> +static void show_reach_rlimit_sigpending(void)
> +{
> + DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(printk_rl_state, 5 * HZ, 10);
This needs to have `static' storage. This bug should have been
apparent in your testing?
> + if (!__ratelimit(&printk_rl_state))
> + return;
> +
> + printk(KERN_INFO "%s/%d: reached RLIMIT_SIGPENDING.\n",
> + current->comm, current->pid);
> +}
> ...
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-31 8:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-30 11:36 [PATCH] show message when exceeded rlimit of pending signals Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-10-30 21:33 ` Andrew Morton
2009-10-30 21:45 ` Joe Perches
2009-10-30 23:21 ` [PATCH] kernel.h: Add printk_ratelimited and pr_<level>_rl Joe Perches
2009-11-02 15:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-05 14:16 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-11-05 14:44 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-11-09 21:49 ` Andrew Morton
2009-11-09 22:05 ` Joe Perches
2009-11-09 22:28 ` Randy Dunlap
2009-11-10 5:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-10 5:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-10 7:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-11-10 7:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-10 7:54 ` Joe Perches
2009-11-10 8:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-31 7:58 ` [PATCH] show message when exceeded rlimit of pending signals Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-10-31 8:50 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-10-31 8:57 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-10-31 11:05 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-10-23 10:07 Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-10-23 11:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-24 7:02 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-10-24 8:56 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-10-24 8:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-26 10:17 ` nooiwa
2009-10-26 11:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-26 16:37 ` Roland McGrath
2009-10-26 16:39 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-10-26 20:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-27 2:58 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
2009-10-27 4:36 ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2009-10-27 8:27 ` nooiwa
2009-10-23 21:07 ` Roland McGrath
2009-10-24 8:27 ` Naohiro Ooiwa
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=20091031015708.1307aea5.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nooiwa@miraclelinux.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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