From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: fan.yu9@zte.com.cn
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, frederic@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
brauner@kernel.org, iro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
joel.granados@kernel.org, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
xu.xin16@zte.com.cn, yang.yang29@zte.com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next v2] signal: clarify __send_signal_locked comment in do_notify_parent
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2025 17:40:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250729154025.GC18541@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250729152759994n3YKgjxLglCCPkOtYtU2U@zte.com.cn>
On 07/29, fan.yu9@zte.com.cn wrote:
>
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -2252,8 +2252,10 @@ bool do_notify_parent(struct task_struct *tsk, int sig)
> sig = 0;
> }
> /*
> - * Send with __send_signal as si_pid and si_uid are in the
> - * parent's namespaces.
> + * Use __send_signal_locked() instead of send_signal_locked()
> + * because si_pid and si_uid are already in the parent's
> + * namespace. send_signal_locked() would incorrectly modify
> + * them when crossing PID/user namespaces.
> */
Somehow I'd still prefer the previous version which simply kills this comment,
but as I said I won't argue.
However. It seems to me that the new comment adds another confusion. I'll try
to recheck tomorrow, I am very busy today.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-29 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-29 7:27 [PATCH linux-next v2] signal: clarify __send_signal_locked comment in do_notify_parent fan.yu9
2025-07-29 15:40 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2025-07-30 11:30 ` fan.yu9
2025-07-30 15:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-31 14:39 ` fan.yu9
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=20250729154025.GC18541@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=fan.yu9@zte.com.cn \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=iro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=joel.granados@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=xu.xin16@zte.com.cn \
--cc=yang.yang29@zte.com.cn \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).