From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] sysrq: Use SEND_SIG_FORCED instead of force_sig()
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:00:24 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120324110024.GA14067@lizard> (raw)
Change send_sig_all() to use do_send_sig_info(SEND_SIG_FORCED)
instead of force_sig(SIGKILL). With the recent changes we do not
need force_ to kill the CLONE_NEWPID tasks.
And this is more correct. force_sig() can race with the exiting
thread, while do_send_sig_info(group => true) kill the whole
process.
Some more notes from Oleg Nesterov:
> Just one note. This change makes no difference for sysrq_handle_kill().
> But it obviously changes the behaviour sysrq_handle_term(). I think
> this is fine, if you want to really kill the task which blocks/ignores
> SIGTERM you can use sysrq_handle_kill().
>
> Even ignoring the reasons why force_sig() is simply wrong here,
> force_sig(SIGTERM) looks strange. The task won't be killed if it has
> a handler, but SIG_IGN can't help. However if it has the handler
> but blocks SIGTERM temporary (this is very common) it will be killed.
Also,
> force_sig() can't kill the process if the main thread has already
> exited. IOW, it is trivial to create the process which can't be
> killed by sysrq.
So, this patch fixes the issue.
Suggested-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
---
The patch depends on a few Oleg's patches in -mm, so I believe
this should be -mm material as well.
drivers/tty/sysrq.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tty/sysrq.c b/drivers/tty/sysrq.c
index 8db9125..5ab8039 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/sysrq.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/sysrq.c
@@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ static void send_sig_all(int sig)
if (is_global_init(p))
continue;
- force_sig(sig, p);
+ do_send_sig_info(sig, SEND_SIG_FORCED, p, true);
}
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
}
--
1.7.9.2
next reply other threads:[~2012-03-24 11:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-24 11:00 Anton Vorontsov [this message]
2012-03-26 22:43 ` [PATCH] sysrq: Use SEND_SIG_FORCED instead of force_sig() Andrew Morton
2012-03-27 13:03 ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-03-28 20:52 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-03-28 21:08 ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-28 21:26 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] <13288070803232@kroah.org>
[not found] ` <20120210201008.GA21009@redhat.com>
2012-02-14 22:50 ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-02-14 23:03 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2012-02-15 13:53 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=20120324110024.GA14067@lizard \
--to=anton.vorontsov@linaro.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.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