From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, Edward Liaw <edliaw@google.com>,
Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@google.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] posix-timers: Prefer delivery of signals to the current thread
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 17:23:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240404152356.GE7153@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87v84x9nad.ffs@tglx>
On 04/04, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 04 2024 at 15:43, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > And this will happen with
> > or without the commit bcb7ee79029dca ("posix-timers: Prefer delivery of
> > signals to the current thread"). Any thread can dequeue a shared signal,
> > say, on return from interrupt.
> >
> > Just without that commit this "eventually" means A_LOT_OF_TIME
> > statistically.
>
> bcb7ee79029dca only directs the wakeup to current, but the signal is
> still queued in the process wide shared pending list. So the thread
> which sees sigpending() first will grab and deliver it to itself.
This is what I tried to say above.
> What we can actually test is the avoidance of waking up the main thread
> by doing the following in the main thread:
Hmm... I think it can be even simpler,
> I'm testing a modification which implements something like the above and
> the success condition is that the main thread does not return early from
> nanosleep() and has no signal accounted. It survived 2000 iterations by
> now.
Yes, but please see a trivial test-case I sent you few minutes ago.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-04 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-16 12:30 [PATCH v6 1/2] posix-timers: Prefer delivery of signals to the current thread Marco Elver
2023-03-16 12:30 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] selftests/timers/posix_timers: Test delivery of signals across threads Marco Elver
2024-04-06 20:53 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-04-06 21:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-06 21:32 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2023-03-30 10:19 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] posix-timers: Prefer delivery of signals to the current thread Marco Elver
2023-04-06 14:12 ` Marco Elver
2023-04-06 15:13 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2023-04-06 20:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-01 20:17 ` John Stultz
2024-04-02 9:07 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2024-04-02 14:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-02 17:23 ` John Stultz
2024-04-03 12:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-03 15:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-03 15:43 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-03 16:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-03 18:16 ` John Stultz
2024-04-03 19:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-03 19:35 ` John Stultz
2024-04-03 22:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-04 14:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-04 18:08 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-06 15:09 ` [PATCH] selftests/timers/posix_timers: reimplement check_timer_distribution() Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-06 15:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-06 22:00 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-08 8:30 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2024-04-08 10:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-08 10:26 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-08 18:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-08 22:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-09 11:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-09 11:45 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2024-04-09 12:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-09 13:38 ` [PATCH v2] " Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-10 22:21 ` John Stultz
2024-04-10 22:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-10 22:33 ` John Stultz
2024-04-11 12:41 ` [PATCH] " Mark Brown
2024-04-11 15:33 ` John Stultz
2024-04-11 12:44 ` Mark Brown
2024-04-11 14:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-11 15:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-11 16:03 ` Mark Brown
2024-04-12 12:35 ` [PATCH] selftests: fix build failure with NOLIBC Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-14 7:42 ` Mark Brown
2024-04-04 8:55 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] posix-timers: Prefer delivery of signals to the current thread Dmitry Vyukov
2024-04-04 13:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-04-04 15:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-04 15:23 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2024-04-05 4:28 ` Dmitry Vyukov
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=20240404152356.GE7153@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=cmllamas@google.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=edliaw@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).