From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 10:24:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160310102412.GA21593@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160309144140.GJ27018@dhcp22.suse.cz>
* Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > Why? Each syscall already is killable as the task might be killed by the OOM
> > > killer.
> >
> > Not all syscalls are interruptible - for example sys_sync() isn't:
>
> I guess we are talking past each other. [...]
Heh, you are being polite, I think what happened is that I was being dense and
didn't understand your point:
> [...] What I meant was that while all syscalls are allowed to not return to the
> userspace because the task might get killed but not all of them accept to get
> interrupted by a signal and return with EINTR. None of the man page of mmap,
> mremap, mlock, mprotect list EINTR as a possibility so I would be really afraid
> of returning an unexpected error code.
Indeed.
> Does this make more sense now?
It does!
Thanks,
Ingo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 11:24:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160310102412.GA21593@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160309144140.GJ27018@dhcp22.suse.cz>
* Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > Why? Each syscall already is killable as the task might be killed by the OOM
> > > killer.
> >
> > Not all syscalls are interruptible - for example sys_sync() isn't:
>
> I guess we are talking past each other. [...]
Heh, you are being polite, I think what happened is that I was being dense and
didn't understand your point:
> [...] What I meant was that while all syscalls are allowed to not return to the
> userspace because the task might get killed but not all of them accept to get
> interrupted by a signal and return with EINTR. None of the man page of mmap,
> mremap, mlock, mprotect list EINTR as a possibility so I would be really afraid
> of returning an unexpected error code.
Indeed.
> Does this make more sense now?
It does!
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-10 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-02 20:19 [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 01/12] locking, rwsem: get rid of __down_write_nested Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 02/12] locking, rwsem: drop explicit memory barriers Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 03/12] locking, rwsem: introduce basis for down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 04/12] alpha, rwsem: provide __down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 05/12] ia64, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 06/12] s390, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 07/12] sh, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 11:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-02-03 11:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-02-03 12:11 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 12:11 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 08/12] sparc, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 09/12] xtensa, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 10/12] x86, rwsem: simplify __down_write Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 8:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-03 8:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-03 12:10 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 12:10 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-03 16:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-03 16:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-03 22:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-03 22:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-09 14:40 ` David Howells
2016-06-09 14:40 ` David Howells
2016-06-09 17:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-09 17:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-10 16:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-06-10 16:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 11/12] x86, rwsem: provide __down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41 ` [RFC 11/12 v1] " Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 12/12] locking, rwsem: provide down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-19 12:15 ` [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore Michal Hocko
2016-02-19 12:15 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 12:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 12:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 12:56 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 12:56 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 13:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 13:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 13:28 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 13:28 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 13:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 13:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 14:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 14:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-10 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2016-03-10 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160310102412.GA21593@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@zankel.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.