Philippe Gerum wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:

[a few interruptions later]

Jan Kiszka wrote:

Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:

BTW, please, could someone confirm the rt_task_delete(NULL) bug in SVN?


Half-confirmed, there is something fishy. I'm struggling with the
debugger ATM, not sure yet who's wrong ;). It tells me rt_task_delete of
the skin module is entered with task != NULL...



...which turns out to be fine, just appears redundant to me when
comparing __rt_task_delete and rt_task_delete for the task=NULL case.

Anyway, leaving a native task with rt_task_delete(NULL) raises SIGKILL
to the whole process instead of just the task (pthread). This lets your
program terminate unexpectedly - I would say: a bug. And this doesn't
happen with 2.1?


It's a side-effect of a recent bug fix in ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c; now killing

Er, "deleting" is the right word here. Sending a thread a termination signal must kill the entire process as per POSIX, and will continue to do so. Calling rt_task_delete() to explicitely delete a single thread from within the containing process is another story. The current issue is due to the fact that no distinction is made on the caller: rt_task_delete() targeting a thread from another process should wipe out the entire target process; otherwise, only the local target thread should be deleted. It's not clear whether we should still wipe out the entire process when the target thread is not the current one, regardless of the fact such thread is a member of the same process or not.
I'm open to suggestions.

 a thread raises a group signal wiping out the entire process.
Ok, it's a bit drastic, will fix.

I guess the easiest way to solve this is to catch NULL in userspace and
call pthread_exit() in favour of the skin service (the POSIX skin uses
pthread_exit anyway), see attached patch. Someone just has to confirm
that there will be no problem hidden by this approach.


Passing NULL needs to work including from user-space; the kernel-space is ok with this, and the API must behave the same way regardless of the execution space. Should fix as needed.


Jan


PS: What's the reason for "if (err == -ESRCH) return 0" in
src/skins/native/task.c, rt_task_delete? Why is that error generate in
the first place if it is zeroed out here?


------------------------------------------------------------------------

Index: src/skins/native/task.c
===================================================================
--- src/skins/native/task.c    (revision 923)
+++ src/skins/native/task.c    (working copy)
@@ -212,7 +212,10 @@ int rt_task_delete (RT_TASK *task)
 {
     int err;
- if (task && task->opaque2) {
+    if (!task)
+    pthread_exit(NULL);
+
+    if (task->opaque2) {
     err = pthread_cancel((pthread_t)task->opaque2);
     if (err)
         return -err;





--

Philippe.

_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core

Reply via email to