From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261464AbTLHSpr (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 13:45:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261506AbTLHSpr (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 13:45:47 -0500 Received: from ns.transas.com ([193.125.200.2]:61705 "EHLO harvester.transas.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261464AbTLHSpp (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 13:45:45 -0500 Message-ID: <2E74F312D6980D459F3A05492BA40F8D0391B0EE@clue.transas.com> From: Andrew Volkov To: William Lee Irwin III Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: PROBLEM: possible proceses leak Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 21:45:17 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Yes. And same bug in kernel/sched.c in ALL *_sleep_on Andrey ========================================================== --- kernel/sched.c.old 2003-12-08 21:39:08.000000000 +0300 +++ kernel/sched.c 2003-12-08 21:40:19.000000000 +0300 @@ -819,10 +819,8 @@ void interruptible_sleep_on(wait_queue_head_t *q) { SLEEP_ON_VAR - - current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; - SLEEP_ON_HEAD + current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; schedule(); SLEEP_ON_TAIL } @@ -831,9 +829,8 @@ { SLEEP_ON_VAR - current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; - SLEEP_ON_HEAD + current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout); SLEEP_ON_TAIL @@ -844,9 +841,8 @@ { SLEEP_ON_VAR - current->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE; - SLEEP_ON_HEAD + current->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE; schedule(); SLEEP_ON_TAIL } @@ -855,9 +851,8 @@ { SLEEP_ON_VAR - current->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE; - SLEEP_ON_HEAD + current->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE; timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout); SLEEP_ON_TAIL