From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "chunlei.wang" <Chunlei.wang@mediatek.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, wsd_upstream@mediatek.com,
weiwei.zhang@mediatek.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] siganl: ignore other signals when doing coredump
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 21:17:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200803191725.GA2078@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1596185654.11648.1.camel@mbjsdccf07>
On 07/31, chunlei.wang wrote:
>
> Please tell us much more about why you think Linux would benefit from
> this change. Precisely what operational problems are you seeing with
> the current code?
> =>
> Sorry for the late reply.
>
> If coredump is incomplete, R&D can not find root cause through
> coredump.
> If the issue is seldom, this modification will speed up the process of
> solving the problem.
To be honest, I do not even know what can I say, except that I disagree
with this change. The very idea looks wrong to me.
Granted, SIGKILL can kill the process which does something useful. Say,
dumps a core. So what?
Where does this SIGKILL come from? How often does this happen?
And why do you think the core dumping is special? Say, you try to debug
the buggy application, but a sudden SIGKILL kills the debuggee and you
lose the debugging session. Does this mean that the kernel needs another
patch to protect the process running under gdb from SIGKILL?
I don't think so. Please feel free to resend this patch, but it needs
a very convincing changelog. And please send it to lkml.
Oleg.
parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-03 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <1596185654.11648.1.camel@mbjsdccf07>]
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=20200803191725.GA2078@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=Chunlei.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=weiwei.zhang@mediatek.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=wsd_upstream@mediatek.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 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).