Sebastien Dugue wrote:
>
> +static long aio_setup_sigevent(struct aio_notify *notify,
> + struct sigevent __user *user_event)
> +{
> + sigevent_t event;
> + struct task_struct *target;
> +
> + if (copy_from_user(&event, user_event, sizeof(event)))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + if (event.sigev_notify == SIGEV_NONE)
> + return 0;
> +
> + notify->notify = event.sigev_notify;
> + notify->signo = event.sigev_signo;
> + notify->value = event.sigev_value;
> +
> + read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
We don't need tasklist_lock, we can use rcu_read_lock() instead.
> + target = good_sigevent(&event);
> +
> + if (unlikely(!target || (target->flags & PF_EXITING)))
> + goto out_unlock;
PF_EXITING check is racy and unneded. In fact, it is wrong. If the main
thread is already died, we can only use SIGEV_THREAD_ID signals, because
otherwise good_sigevent() returns ->group_leader.
> @@ -994,6 +1077,15 @@ int fastcall aio_complete(struct kiocb *
> kunmap_atomic(ring, KM_IRQ1);
>
> pr_debug("added to ring %p at [%lu]\n", iocb, tail);
> +
> + if (iocb->ki_notify.notify != SIGEV_NONE) {
> + ret = aio_send_signal(&iocb->ki_notify);
> +
> + /* If signal generation failed, release the sigqueue */
> + if (ret)
> + sigqueue_free(iocb->ki_notify.sigq);
We should not use sigqueue_free() here. It takes current->sighand->siglock
to remove sigqueue from "struct sigpending". But current is just a "random"
process here.
Yes, if I understand this patch correctly, it is not possible that this
sigqueue is pending, but still this is bad imho.
> static void __sigqueue_free(struct sigqueue *q)
> {
> - if (q->flags & SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC)
> + if (q->flags & SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC && q->info.si_code != SI_ASYNCIO)
> return;
Oh, this is not nice. Could we change send_sigqueue/send_group_sigqueue
instead ?
- BUG_ON(!(q->flags & SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC));
+ BUG_ON(!(q->flags & SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC) && q->info.si_code != SI_ASYNCIO);
This way aio can use __sigqueue_alloc/__sigqueue_free directly and forget
about SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC.
On the other hand, imho this patch takes a wrong direction.
The purpose of SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC + send_sigqueue() is to re-use the same
sigqueue while sending a stream of signals. But in aio case we allocate
sigqueue to send only 1 signal, then it freed after the delivery like
the regular sigqueue. So what is the point?
I'd suggest to not use this interface. Just use group_send_sig_info() or
specific_send_sig_info(). Yes, this way we will do GFP_ATOMIC allocation
of sigqueue in interrupt context, but is this so bad in this case?
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
