Am 26.03.21 um 16:01 schrieb Jens Axboe: > On 3/26/21 7:48 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >> Jens, sorry, I got lost :/ > > Let's bring you back in :-) > >> On 03/25, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> >>> With IO threads accepting signals, including SIGSTOP, >> >> where can I find this change? Looks like I wasn't cc'ed... > > It's this very series. > >>> unmask the >>> SIGSTOP signal from the default blocked mask. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> kernel/fork.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c >>> index d3171e8e88e5..d5a40552910f 100644 >>> --- a/kernel/fork.c >>> +++ b/kernel/fork.c >>> @@ -2435,7 +2435,7 @@ struct task_struct *create_io_thread(int (*fn)(void *), void *arg, int node) >>> tsk = copy_process(NULL, 0, node, &args); >>> if (!IS_ERR(tsk)) { >>> sigfillset(&tsk->blocked); >>> - sigdelsetmask(&tsk->blocked, sigmask(SIGKILL)); >>> + sigdelsetmask(&tsk->blocked, sigmask(SIGKILL)|sigmask(SIGSTOP)); >> >> siginitsetinv(blocked, sigmask(SIGKILL)|sigmask(SIGSTOP)) but this is minor. > > Ah thanks. > >> To remind, either way this is racy and can't really help. >> >> And if "IO threads accepting signals" then I don't understand why. Sorry, >> I must have missed something. > > I do think the above is a no-op at this point, and we can probably just > kill it. Let me double check, hopefully we can just remove this blocked > part. Is this really correct to drop in your "kernel: stop masking signals in create_io_thread()" commit? I don't assume signals wanted by userspace should potentially handled in an io_thread... e.g. things set with fcntl(fd, F_SETSIG,) used together with F_SETLEASE? metze