Re: 2.6.30-rc6: Reported regressions from 2.6.29

Linus Torvalds
2009-05-18T15:35:37Z

On Mon, 18 May 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Btw., why did the patch (and the revert) make any difference to the
> test? Timing differences look improbable.

It's the change from

!signal_group_exit(signal)

to

!sig_kernel_only(signr)

and quite frankly, I still don't see the point.

The comment seems to be wrong too:

If SIGSTOP/SIGKILL originate from a descendant of container-init they are
never queued (i.e dropped in sig_ignored() in an earler patch).

If SIGSTOP/SIGKILL originate from parent namespace, the signal is queued
and container-init processes the signal.

since the bug was that the SIGSTOP (from within the same container) was
_not_ ignored like the comment says.

Linus