Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754067AbZFHSkz (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2009 14:40:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750894AbZFHSks (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2009 14:40:48 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:48816 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750725AbZFHSks (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2009 14:40:48 -0400 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 20:36:27 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Roland McGrath Cc: David Howells , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Q: PTRACE_ATTACH && -EINTR Message-ID: <20090608183627.GA14734@redhat.com> References: <20090608161204.GA3986@redhat.com> <20090608173944.B57EBFC3C6@magilla.sf.frob.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090608173944.B57EBFC3C6@magilla.sf.frob.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1546 Lines: 44 On 06/08, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > Or even -ERESTARTNOINTR ? Or just mutex_lock() ? > > -ERESTARTNOINTR is right. > > There is nothing wrong with making it interruptible, and that might help > something or other overall, or even be important to avoid a deadlock or > something in some strange situation. Agreed. > But since the call could never return > -EINTR before, we can't make it start now. Yes. -EINTR just wrong. > > Or ignore this problem since nobody complained? > > There has barely been time for anyone to do something strange enough to hit > it, and they would probably not have realized what was going on even if it > did hit. We know we broke the ABI contract, we have to fix it. > > Note that every use of mutex_lock_interruptible and also down_interruptible > can return -EINTR. This means these really should never be used in the way > where their return value is returned directly from some system call. Every > user-visible call that gets interrupted needs to return some -ERESTART* > code and never -EINTR directly. Sure. And we have other users of mutex_lock_interruptible() which deserve a fix. As for ->cred_exec_mutex, I think do_execve() needs a fix as well. It was renamed in -next. Should I send these fixes now for 2.6.20, or we can wait for 2.6.31 ? 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/