Hi, Oleg: On 10/23/18 12:43 PM, Enke Chen wrote: >> >>> --- a/fs/coredump.c >>> +++ b/fs/coredump.c >>> @@ -546,6 +546,7 @@ void do_coredump(const kernel_siginfo_t *siginfo) >>> struct cred *cred; >>> int retval = 0; >>> int ispipe; >>> + bool notify; >>> struct files_struct *displaced; >>> /* require nonrelative corefile path and be extra careful */ >>> bool need_suid_safe = false; >>> @@ -590,6 +591,15 @@ void do_coredump(const kernel_siginfo_t *siginfo) >>> if (retval < 0) >>> goto fail_creds; >>> >>> + /* >>> + * Send the pre-coredump signal to the parent if requested. >>> + */ >>> + read_lock(&tasklist_lock); >>> + notify = do_notify_parent_predump(current); >>> + read_unlock(&tasklist_lock); >>> + if (notify) >>> + cond_resched(); >> >> Hmm. I do not understand why do we need cond_resched(). And even if we need it, >> why we can't call it unconditionally? > > Remember the goal is to allow the parent (e.g., a process manager) to take early > action. The "yield" before doing coredump will help. > > The yield is made conditional because the notification is conditional. > Is that ok? Given this is in do_coredump(), it is ok to make it unconditional for simplicity. >> >>> +bool do_notify_parent_predump(struct task_struct *tsk) >>> +{ >>> + struct sighand_struct *sighand; >>> + struct kernel_siginfo info; >>> + struct task_struct *parent; >>> + unsigned long flags; >>> + pid_t pid; >>> + int sig; >>> + >>> + parent = tsk->parent; >>> + sighand = parent->sighand; >>> + pid = task_tgid_vnr(tsk); >>> + >>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&sighand->siglock, flags); >>> + sig = parent->signal->predump_signal; >>> + if (!valid_predump_signal(sig)) { >>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sighand->siglock, flags); >>> + return false; >>> + } >> >> Why do we need to check parent->signal->predump_signal under ->siglock? >> This complicates the code for no reason, afaics. Will simplify. Thanks. -- Enke