On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Quite frankly, it strikes me that if we want to do this, then we shouldn't
> save the _process_ information at all, we should save the "sighand"
> instead.
>
> So either we save the process info, or we save the sighand, but saving the
> "group_leader" seems totally bogus. Especially as the group leader can
> change (by execve()).
>
> One thing that strikes me as I look at that function is that the whole
> signalfd thing doesn't seem to do any reference counting. Ie it looks
> totally buggy wrt passing the resulting fd off to somebody else, and then
> exiting in the original process.
>
> What did I miss?
We intercept the sighand going out of business, and we do not access it
anymore after that (by the mean of signalfd_lock() returning zero).
I'd be OK with Oleg patch, although I really prefer signalfd being more
flexible (that is, with sync signals disabled in signalfd, and with Ben's
patch reverted). Unless clear point of breakage are shown with such
approach.
- Davide
-
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]
