On 06/28, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > Second, we *must* break that tcp_recvmsg() inside the kthread's > main loop, of course! We want it stopped, after all, and if we don't > make it "break" out of that function, the kthread _will_never_exit_. In that case this kthread is buggy. We have sock->sk_rcvtimeo. > Please note that this > whole thing is about functions that will _simply_*never*_exit_ever_ > _unless_ given a signal. ditto. kthread should not do this. OK, I suggest to stop this thread. I don't claim you are wrong, just we think differently ;) > >This is what I can't understand completely. Why should we check SIGKILL > >or signal_pending() in addition to kthread_stop_info.k, what is the point? > > ... so kthread_stop_info will go away too. it should go away regardless, we have patches. Still I see no point to check signal_pending() in kthread_stop(). 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: "Satyam Sharma" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: "Satyam Sharma" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: "Satyam Sharma" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- From: "Satyam Sharma" <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- Prev by Date: Fwd: Mounting MMC card
- Next by Date: Mounting MMC card
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] RFC: have tcp_recvmsg() check kthread_should_stop() and treat it as if it were signalled
- Index(es):
 |