On 11/01, Tejun Heo wrote: > > Hello, > > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 07:13:29PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 11/01, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > > > > Yeah yeah, Trond already pointed it out. I forgot about the > > > sigpending special case in schedule(), which I think is rather odd, > > > > I disagree with "rather odd" ;) > > > > We have a lot of examples of > > > > current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; > > ... > > if (signal_pending()) > > break; > > schedule(); > > > > Without that special case in schedule() the code above becomes racy. > > Just consider __wait_event_interruptible(). > > But __wait_event_interruptible() does proper set-TASK_*, check > sigpending and schedule() sequence. As long as the waker performs > seg-sigpending, wakeup sequence in the correct order, nothing is > broken (as w/ any other wakeup conditions). The special case deals > with callers which don't check sigpending between set-TASK_* and > schedule() and that's the part I think is a bit odd. OK, agreed, __wait_event_interruptible() was a bad example. Yes, this is only needed for the code which doesn't check signal_pending() "properly", or doesn't check it at all before schedule(). OK, say, wait_for_completion_interruptible(). Or schedule_timeout_interruptible(). I suspect we have a lot more examples. Historically linux allows to set TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and schedule() without any checks. > Whether I feel > odd or not is irrelevant tho - it's already there. Yes, I don't think we can remove it. > > > Any better ideas? > > > > Well. As a simple (probably temporary) fix, I'd suggest > > > > #define wait_event_freezekillable(wq, condition) > > { > > freezer_do_not_count(); > > __retval = wait_event_killable(condition); > > freezer_count(); > > __retval; > > } > > > > Do you think it can work? > > Yeah, probably. I was hoping to remove count/do_not_count tho. Or at least rename it ;) > Hmmm... maybe we can just flip PF_NOFREEZE instead with a bit of > modification, I think. Perhaps. Or we can add TASK_FREEZABLE (like TASK_WAKEKILL), iirc we already discussed this some time ago. And probably it makes sense to add the generic wait_event_state(). Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html