On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Umm... What if we delay __sigqueue_free()? After all, that's where the
> fat sucker normally comes from. That way we might get away with much
> smaller structure on stack...
Sounds like the RightThing(tm) to do to me, and I don't see why it
wouldn't work.
We'd have to teach each user of "dequeue_signal()" to free the siginfo
thing. Which shouldn't be too bad - I think we've collected all of
that into generic code, and there isn't the mass or architecture code
that knows about these things any more. But there are a few odd
drivers etc and signalfd. I didn't look at what the lifetimes were.
Adding Oleg to the cc, since any time we touch any of that code, he
should be involved. Oleg - the issue is the biggish size of 'struct
ksignal' on stack, brought on by the silly "put a whole siginfo_t in
it".
Linus
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
