Re: [PATCH 1/2] bcache: ignore pending signals in bcache_device_init()

[Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>]

On Wed 04-03-20 14:02:09, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/04, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> >  /*
> > - * Flush all pending signals for this kthread.
> > + * Flush all pending signals for this kthread. Please note that this interface
> > + * shouldn't be and if there is a need for it then it should be clearly
> > + * documented why.
> > + *
> > + * 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
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I still think this is too strong statement...
> 
> Even if it seems that most current users of flush_signals() are wrong.
> 
> > because signal should be processed
> > + * by kernel_dequeue_signal rather than dropping them on the floor.
> 
> Yes, but to remind we need some cleanups to ensure that
> s/flush_signals/kernel_dequeue_signal/ is always "safe" even when only a
> single signal is allowed,
> 
> > The only
> > + * exception when flush_signals could be used is a micro-optimization when
> > + * only a single signal is allowed when retreiving the specific signal number
> > + * is not needed. Please document this usage.
> >   */
> 
> Agreed.

Care to send a patch? I am pretty sure you would provide a more fitting
wording. All I want to achieve is clarification what people should do.
THis is a terrible interface and many bogus users are just proving the
fact so the more specific about expected usage the better.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs