Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> We go through various hoops to disallow signals for the IO threads, but
> there's really no reason why we cannot just allow them. The IO threads
> never return to userspace like a normal thread, and hence don't go through
> normal signal processing. Instead, just check for a pending signal as part
> of the work loop, and call get_signal() to handle it for us if anything
> is pending.
>
> With that, we can support receiving signals, including special ones like
> SIGSTOP.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/io-wq.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++-------
> fs/io_uring.c | 12 ++++++++----
> 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/io-wq.c b/fs/io-wq.c
> index b7c1fa932cb3..3e2f059a1737 100644
> --- a/fs/io-wq.c
> +++ b/fs/io-wq.c
> @@ -16,7 +16,6 @@
> #include <linux/rculist_nulls.h>
> #include <linux/cpu.h>
> #include <linux/tracehook.h>
> -#include <linux/freezer.h>
>
> #include "../kernel/sched/sched.h"
> #include "io-wq.h"
> @@ -503,10 +502,16 @@ static int io_wqe_worker(void *data)
> if (io_flush_signals())
> continue;
> ret = schedule_timeout(WORKER_IDLE_TIMEOUT);
> - if (try_to_freeze() || ret)
> + if (signal_pending(current)) {
> + struct ksignal ksig;
> +
> + if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
> + break;
> + if (get_signal(&ksig))
> + continue;
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That is wrong. You are promising to deliver a signal to signal
handler and them simply discarding it. Perhaps:
if (!get_signal(&ksig))
continue;
WARN_ON(!sig_kernel_stop(ksig->sig));
break;
Eric
