On 12/03, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > Depends on > > [PATCH] __group_complete_signal: fix coredump with group stop race > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=119653436116036 > > > > Needs review and testing. > > > > Please comment, I think at least the idea is promising. > > It looks clean and sane to me, but I'm currently more worried about > 2.6.24, and even the first patch this depends on (coredump/stop race) > makes me a bit nervous since all these things tend to have some rather > subtle interactions with other parts that depended on the exact semantics > of all the signal issues. > > So my gut feel - considering that none of the problems involved here are > exactly new - is that this is good material for early in the 2.6.25 cycle. > > But I think the whole series looks ok, and if people press me and convince > me it's (a) well tested and (b) needed early, then I guess it can be > pushed into 2.6.24.
No, no, I don't think this should be pushed into 2.6.24 (even the first patch). These problems are very old afaics, and nobody complained so far. Even if correct, this needs more testing. I don't think this can break exec or coredump in some "obvious" way, but I'm afraid this can introduce new races / corner cases. <offtopic> I hope that with the new meaning of ->group_exit_task we can re-introduce the "coredump signal "freezes" the thread group at sender's side" property, but we need some hack to do this. OTOH, it was always a hack. </offtopic> Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
