Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190709165725.GA2190@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190709165725.GA2190@redhat.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 10 Jul 2019 21:05:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj00gDz=tX-b5C-xwdogZSaKtRJEDh3SGB69D8W+Wsr2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] dlm updates for 5.3
To:     David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Cc:     Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 9:57 AM David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Apart from a couple trivial fixes, the more notable fix makes the dlm
> continuing waiting for a user space result if a signal interrupts the
> wait event.

What? No.

That's not sensible at all.

If wait_event_interruptible() returns -ERESTARTSYS, it means that we
have a signal pending.

And if we have a signal pending, then you can't go back and call
wait_event_interruptible() in a loop, because the signal will
*continue* to be pending, so now your "wait event" becomes a kernel
busy loop.

If you don't want to react to signals, then you shouldn't use the
"interruptible()" version of wait-event.

I'm not pulling this. Because the code looks completely and utterly wrong to me.

Am I missing something? Feel free to educate me and re-submit.

               Linus