Re: [PATCH 5/6] nohz: support PR_DATAPLANE_STRICT mode

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:38:58AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 01:58:46PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> > @@ -436,6 +436,20 @@ static void dataplane_quiesce(void)
> >  			(jiffies - start));
> >  		dump_stack();
> >  	}
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Kill the process if it violates STRICT mode.  Note that this
> > +	 * code also results in killing the task if a kernel bug causes an
> > +	 * irq to be delivered to this core.
> > +	 */
> > +	if ((task->dataplane_flags & (PR_DATAPLANE_STRICT|PR_DATAPLANE_PRCTL))
> > +	    == PR_DATAPLANE_STRICT) {
> > +		pr_warn("Dataplane STRICT mode violated; process killed.\n");
> > +		dump_stack();
> > +		task->dataplane_flags &= ~PR_DATAPLANE_QUIESCE;
> > +		local_irq_enable();
> > +		do_group_exit(SIGKILL);
> > +	}
> >  }
> 
> So while I'm all for hard fails like this, can we not provide a wee bit
> more information in the siginfo ? And maybe use a slightly less fatal
> signal, such that userspace can actually catch it and dump state in
> debug modes?

Agreed, a bit more debug state would be helpful.

							Thanx, Paul

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux