From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87F9123CB for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 08:40:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729759213; cv=none; b=IrVRTC5znz5kRTc4G0QoKRDE2spstXaJyxR8u27ug/uRpnxPdW5JVt09sfTv6fG4vxp3ntwV28XGWk1IyRyAVkyAD6EhfToeLL8FTbGS7KSsaGyR+zvDDA1cpwVya9AGftBPlfuUpegzrxPTlTKAfqz8BaAvzDQXMiMsdi/R7tU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729759213; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GH4sHUH+M6Mz+xsmT4xdWXdaQnJXLi4N6ynxLcQLzmI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=JcvEMvIgfjhrSzmFGL8emN/LV70MJaMZi67ppzgvEA7Jv8LpYNYZytNmRAyU7mZ0Aj7t8K+XpB71jB0B51EVPuo+bnCggM8sD57MLtSTsg19ZsemUHXPUS5iNl4WE6WMBrlIP9YfCW1TTRcwwJtYnpN5BrDpDg+0VHWkn5b4Ds0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=rCzlAipl; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=ND0EAKfK; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="rCzlAipl"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="ND0EAKfK" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1729759208; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=T8B9IRibMV60lb0GD3TOYQTfcm82IgNA9zQnomRsXlA=; b=rCzlAiplXy8o71dfaaVKlYO6+sd9F448bDvJNAHYnizZz2HSn8P8w73EzELytd1aWZlAld o1A+RKYO4sYbR9cVFaPls59oaM9u62M8U74FMNF5OEUAKgcJss5Txs9U8uTOTf7+848wAn tgNVVD61qwo6ZnmXauUim3OG+V603RysQuT4wSK/LSsS6ZnFN5eCq6oM9Rj23Di2MhEdW6 6JlIJCMNwkVcbyd+qZI1h3mSWwFlL/K/5nkXY1puNbyhG5JwWjbodUE9Dg0Pywc0nEZmEb yHzOF19OvUjtvTbFHMjTcSm7Xsr47rUe4S05pYF8wg9HNsDGStgkkANUEei6+A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1729759208; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=T8B9IRibMV60lb0GD3TOYQTfcm82IgNA9zQnomRsXlA=; b=ND0EAKfKI4H0pP66HEFqQf+R96BK1L7WsmQQGYOYTCn4P91KV/72edF8PlFxj3gDNdWBU5 jVdrftpoCjgsJECw== To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: LKML , Anna-Maria Behnsen , John Stultz , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Stephen Boyd , Eric Biederman , Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [patch V5 05/26] posix-timers: Drop signal if timer has been deleted or reprogrammed In-Reply-To: References: <20241001083138.922192481@linutronix.de> <20241001083835.553646280@linutronix.de> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 10:40:08 +0200 Message-ID: <87ttd16gif.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Oct 21 2024 at 14:29, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > Le Tue, Oct 01, 2024 at 10:42:06AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner a =C3=A9crit : >> No point in delivering a signal from the past. POSIX does not specify the >> behaviour here: >>=20 >> - "The effect of disarming or resetting a timer with pending expiration >> notifications is unspecified." >>=20 >> - "The disposition of pending signals for the deleted timer is unspecif= ied." >>=20 >> In both cases it is reasonable to expect that pending signals are >> discarded. Especially in the reprogramming case it does not make sense to >> account for previous overruns or to deliver a signal for a timer which h= as >> been disarmed. > > The change below indeed checks if the timer has been deleted but not if > it has been reprogrammed/disarmed/reset. > > Or am I missing something? No. You are right. This is a change log left over from a previous version. This rearm/disarm part is handled later in the series. Thanks, tglx