Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753526AbZGBIc7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jul 2009 04:32:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751072AbZGBIcp (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jul 2009 04:32:45 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:59123 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750946AbZGBIco (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jul 2009 04:32:44 -0400 Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:29:14 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Neil Horman Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, andi@firstfloor.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, earl_chew@agilent.com, Roland McGrath Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] exec: Allow do_coredump to wait for user space pipe readers to complete (v6) Message-ID: <20090702082854.GA15003@redhat.com> References: <20090622172818.GB14673@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20090701182834.GC31414@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20090701183707.GF31414@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090701183707.GF31414@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> 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: 2074 Lines: 70 (add Roland) Neil, I guess we both are tired of this thread, but I still have questions ;) On 07/01, Neil Horman wrote: > > +static void wait_for_dump_helpers(struct file *file) > +{ > + struct pipe_inode_info *pipe; > + > + pipe = file->f_path.dentry->d_inode->i_pipe; > + > + pipe_lock(pipe); > + pipe->readers++; > + pipe->writers--; > + > + while (pipe->readers > 1) { > + wake_up_interruptible_sync(&pipe->wait); > + kill_fasync(&pipe->fasync_readers, SIGIO, POLL_IN); > + pipe_wait(pipe); > + } > + > + pipe->readers--; > + pipe->writers++; > + pipe_unlock(pipe); > + > +} OK, I think this is simple enough and should work. This is not exactly correct wrt signals, if we get TIF_SIGPENDING this becomes a busy-wait loop. I'd suggest to do while (->readers && !signal_pending()), this is not exactly right too because we have other problems with signals, but this is another story. > void do_coredump(long signr, int exit_code, struct pt_regs *regs) > { > struct core_state core_state; > @@ -1862,6 +1886,8 @@ void do_coredump(long signr, int exit_code, struct pt_regs *regs) > current->signal->group_exit_code |= 0x80; > > close_fail: > + if (ispipe && core_pipe_limit) > + wait_for_dump_helpers(file); Oh. I thought I misread the first version, but now I see I got it right. And now I confused again. So, we only wait if core_pipe_limit != 0. Why? The previous version, v4, called wait_for_dump_helpers() unconditionally. And this looks more right to me. Once again, even without wait_for_dump() the coredumping process can't be reaped until core_pattern app reads all data from the pipe. I won't insist. However, anybody else please take a look? core_pipe_limit != 0 limits the number of coredump-via-pipe in flight, OK. But, should wait_for_dump_helpers() depend on core_limit_pipe != 0? 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/