On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Bruce Evans wrote:

> Maybe just remove the foot-shooting that releases it?
>
> % Index: kern_sig.c
> % ===================================================================
> % RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/kern/kern_sig.c,v
> % retrieving revision 1.170
> % retrieving revision 1.171
> % diff -u -1 -r1.170 -r1.171
> % --- kern_sig.c      29 Jun 2002 02:00:01 -0000      1.170
> % +++ kern_sig.c      29 Jun 2002 17:26:18 -0000      1.171
> % @@ -1486,15 +1540,9 @@
> %              */
> % -           if (p->p_stat == SRUN) {
> % +           mtx_unlock_spin(&sched_lock);
>               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ shoot foot
> % +           if (td->td_state == TDS_RUNQ ||
> % +               td->td_state == TDS_RUNNING) {
>
> I think sched_lock is needed for checking td_state too (strictly to use
> the result of the check, so the lock is not critical if the use doesn't
> do anything harmful), but there is no lock indication for td_state
> in proc.h like there used to be for p_stat.
>
> % +                   signotify(td->td_proc);
>
> Holding sched_lock when calling signotify() used to be an error, but that
> was changed in rev.1.155.  This signotify() call seems to be bogus anyway.
> signotify() should only be called after the signal mask is changed.  The
> call to signotify() here was removed in rev.1.154 when the semantics of
> signotify() was changed a little.  Bogus calls to signotify() just waste
> time.
>
> %  #ifdef SMP
> % -                   struct kse *ke;
> % -                   struct thread *td = curthread;
> % -/* we should only deliver to one thread.. but which one? */
> % -                   FOREACH_KSEGRP_IN_PROC(p, kg) {
> % -                           FOREACH_KSE_IN_GROUP(kg, ke) {
> % -                                   if (ke->ke_thread == td) {
> % -                                           continue;
> % -                                   }
> % -                                   forward_signal(ke->ke_thread);
> % -                           }
> % -                   }
> % +                   if (td->td_state == TDS_RUNNING && td != curthread)
> % +                           forward_signal(td);
> %  #endif
>
> forward_signal() was called with sched_lock held in rev.1.170, and
> forward_signal() still requires it to be held.  I think sched_lock is
> needed for checking td_state too, as above.  Here it is fairly clear
> that calling forward_signal() bogusly after losing a race is harmless.
> It just wakes up td to look for a signal that isn't there or can't
> be handled yet.  Since this only happens if we lose a race, it may be
> more efficient to let it happen (rarely) than to lock (always) to prevent
> it happening.  But we already held the lock so the locking was free
> except for latency issues.
>
> Bruce

Untested fix for thes bugs and some style bugs in tdsignal():

Index: kern_sig.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/kern/kern_sig.c,v
retrieving revision 1.171
diff -u -2 -r1.171 kern_sig.c
--- kern_sig.c  29 Jun 2002 17:26:18 -0000      1.171
+++ kern_sig.c  3 Jul 2002 07:42:31 -0000
@@ -1468,5 +1449,5 @@
 /*
  * The force of a signal has been directed against a single
- * thread. We need to see what we can do about knocking it
+ * thread.  We need to see what we can do about knocking it
  * out of any sleep it may be in etc.
  */
@@ -1485,8 +1466,7 @@
         */
        mtx_lock_spin(&sched_lock);
-       if ((action == SIG_DFL) && (prop & SA_KILL)) {
-               if (td->td_priority > PUSER) {
+       if (action == SIG_DFL && (prop & SA_KILL)) {
+               if (td->td_priority > PUSER)
                        td->td_priority = PUSER;
-               }
        }
        mtx_unlock_spin(&sched_lock);
@@ -1496,7 +1476,7 @@
         * except that stopped processes must be continued by SIGCONT.
         */
-       if (action == SIG_HOLD) {
+       if (action == SIG_HOLD)
                goto out;
-       }
+
        mtx_lock_spin(&sched_lock);
        if (td->td_state == TDS_SLP) {
@@ -1531,24 +1511,17 @@
                }
                goto runfast;
-               /* NOTREACHED */
-
        } else {
                /*
-                * Other states do nothing with the signal immediatly,
+                * Other states do nothing with the signal immediately,
                 * other than kicking ourselves if we are running.
                 * It will either never be noticed, or noticed very soon.
                 */
-               mtx_unlock_spin(&sched_lock);
-               if (td->td_state == TDS_RUNQ ||
-                   td->td_state == TDS_RUNNING) {
-                       signotify(td->td_proc);
 #ifdef SMP
-                       if (td->td_state == TDS_RUNNING && td != curthread)
-                               forward_signal(td);
+               if (td->td_state == TDS_RUNNING && td != curthread)
+                       forward_signal(td);
 #endif
-               }
+               mtx_unlock_spin(&sched_lock);
                goto out;
        }
-       /*NOTREACHED*/

 runfast:
@@ -1557,7 +1530,7 @@
         */
        mtx_lock_spin(&sched_lock);
-       if (td->td_priority > PUSER) {
+       if (td->td_priority > PUSER)
                td->td_priority = PUSER;
-       }
+
 run:
        mtx_assert(&sched_lock, MA_OWNED | MA_NOTRECURSED);


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to