On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Quite frankly, it strikes me that if we want to do this, then we shouldn't > save the _process_ information at all, we should save the "sighand" > instead. > > So either we save the process info, or we save the sighand, but saving the > "group_leader" seems totally bogus. Especially as the group leader can > change (by execve()). > > One thing that strikes me as I look at that function is that the whole > signalfd thing doesn't seem to do any reference counting. Ie it looks > totally buggy wrt passing the resulting fd off to somebody else, and then > exiting in the original process. > > What did I miss?
We intercept the sighand going out of business, and we do not access it anymore after that (by the mean of signalfd_lock() returning zero). I'd be OK with Oleg patch, although I really prefer signalfd being more flexible (that is, with sync signals disabled in signalfd, and with Ben's patch reverted). Unless clear point of breakage are shown with such approach. - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
