All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>,
	axboe@kernel.dk, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, hare@suse.de, mkoutny@suse.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bcache: ignore pending signals in bcache_device_init()
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 09:05:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200303080544.GW4380@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200302134919.GB9769@redhat.com>

On Mon 02-03-20 14:49:19, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/02, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > I cannot really comment on the bcache part because I am not familiar
> > with the code.
> 
> same here...
> 
> > > This patch calls flush_signals() in bcache_device_init() if there is
> > > pending signal for current process. It avoids bcache registration
> > > failure in system boot up time due to bcache udev rule timeout.
> >
> > this sounds like a wrong way to address the issue. Killing the udev
> > worker is a userspace policy and the kernel shouldn't simply ignore it.
> 
> Agreed. If nothing else, if a userspace process has pending SIKILL then
> flush_signals() is very wrong.
> 
> > Btw. Oleg, I have noticed quite a lot of flush_signals usage in the
> > drivers land and I have really hard time to understand their purpose.
> 
> Heh. I bet most if not all users of flush_signals() are simply wrong.
> 
> > What is the actual valid usage of this function?
> 
> I thinks it should die...

Can we simply deprecate it and add a big fat comment explaning why this
is wrong interface to use?

So what about this?
diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
index 9ad8dea93dbb..8a895e565e84 100644
--- a/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/kernel/signal.c
@@ -465,7 +465,13 @@ void flush_sigqueue(struct sigpending *queue)
 }
 
 /*
- * Flush all pending signals for this kthread.
+ * Flush all pending signals for this kthread. Please note that this interface
+ * shouldn't be used and in fact it is DEPRECATED.
+ * Existing users should be double checked because most of them are likely
+ * obsolete. Kernel threads are not on the receiving end of signal delivery
+ * unless they explicitly request that by allow_signal() and in that case
+ * flush_signals is almost always a bug because signal should be processed
+ * by kernel_dequeue_signal rather than dropping them on the floor.
  */
 void flush_signals(struct task_struct *t)
 {
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-03-03  8:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-02  9:34 [PATCH 0/2] bcache patches for Linux v5.6-rc5 Coly Li
2020-03-02  9:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] bcache: ignore pending signals in bcache_device_init() Coly Li
2020-03-02 12:27   ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-02 13:29     ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 13:40       ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-02 17:06         ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 17:28           ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-02 17:47             ` Coly Li
2020-03-03  1:22               ` Guoqing Jiang
2020-03-03  1:30                 ` Coly Li
2020-03-03  6:58           ` Сорокин Артем Сергеевич
2020-04-13  8:17             ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 13:49     ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-02 17:16       ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 17:19         ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-02 17:32           ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 20:33             ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-03  1:08               ` Coly Li
2020-03-03  7:22             ` Hannes Reinecke
2020-03-03  8:05       ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-03-03 12:19         ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-03 16:03           ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-04 11:36             ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 11:53               ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 18:42                 ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-04 11:57               ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-04 12:13                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 12:22                   ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-04 12:33                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 12:41                       ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-04 13:02                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 13:21                           ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-02 15:01     ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-02  9:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] bcache: fix code comments for ignore pending signals Coly Li

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=20200303080544.GW4380@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=colyli@suse.de \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    /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.