From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758154Ab1JGRDM (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Oct 2011 13:03:12 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:43035 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752553Ab1JGRDI (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Oct 2011 13:03:08 -0400 Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 18:58:28 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Srikar Dronamraju Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , Linux-mm , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Linus Torvalds , Masami Hiramatsu , Hugh Dickins , Christoph Hellwig , Andi Kleen , Thomas Gleixner , Jonathan Corbet , Andrew Morton , Jim Keniston , Roland McGrath , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3.1.0-rc4-tip 26/26] uprobes: queue signals while thread is singlestepping. Message-ID: <20111007165828.GA32319@redhat.com> References: <20110920115938.25326.93059.sendpatchset@srdronam.in.ibm.com> <20110920120517.25326.57657.sendpatchset@srdronam.in.ibm.com> <1317128626.15383.61.camel@twins> <20110927131213.GE3685@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20111005180139.GA5704@redhat.com> <20111006054710.GB17591@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111006054710.GB17591@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/06, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > The patch (that I sent out as part of v5 patchset) uses per task > pending sigqueue and start queueing the signals when the task > singlesteps. After completion of singlestep, walks thro the pending > signals. Yes, I see. Doesn't look very nice ;) > But I was thinking if I should block signals instead of queueing them in > a different sigqueue. So Idea is to block signals just before the task > enables singlestep and unblock after task disables singlestep. Agreed, this looks much, much better. In both cases the task is current, it is safe to change ->blocked. But please avoid sigprocmask(), we have set_current_blocked(). Oleg.