Re: + signalfd-retrieve-multiple-signals-with-one-read-call.patch added to -mm tree

[Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>]

On Mon, 21 May 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> > +		schedule();
> > +		locked = signalfd_lock(ctx, &lk);
> > +		if (unlikely(!locked)) {
> > +			/*
> > +			 * Let the caller read zero byte, ala socket
> > +			 * recv() when the peer disconnect. This test
> > +			 * must be done before doing a dequeue_signal(),
> > +			 * because if the sighand has been orphaned,
> > +			 * the dequeue_signal() call is going to crash.
> > +			 */
> 
> Imho, the comment is a bit confusing. dequeue_signal() needs ->siglock
> even if signalfd_ctx is not orphaned.

The comment looks clear to me. It states:

1) The policy of returning 0 when the sighand has been detached

2) That we _must_not_ call dequeue_signal() in case signalfd_lock() fails

#ACK on the code mod below.



- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/