Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:24:23 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, ebiederm@xmission.com,
       bastian@waldi.eu.org, daniel@hozac.com, xemul@openvz.org,
       containers@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7][v4] Protect cinit from blocked fatal signals
Message-ID: <20090105122423.GA3313@redhat.com>
References: <20081224114414.GA7879@us.ibm.com> <20081224115229.GE8020@us.ibm.com> <20081224160931.GC11593@redhat.com> <20081231000445.CEBC8FC278@magilla.sf.frob.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20081231000445.CEBC8FC278@magilla.sf.frob.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 780
Lines: 21

On 12/30, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> > > + * If @signal refers to a container-init and @signr is neither SIGKILL nor
> > > + * SIGSTOP, it was queued because it was blocked when it was posted.
> >
> > This is not right too. It is possible that init had a handler when
> > the signal was sent, and the handler was set to SIG_DFL before the
> > signal was dequeued.
>
> do_sigaction's sig_handler_ignored() should exclude that.

Yes sure, but sig_handler_ignored(sig) can be false, it doesn't take
SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE into account.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/