Re: [PATCH 1/4] signal: fix SIGCONT notification code

[Tejun Heo]

Hello, Jan.

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 09:41:36PM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:13:15 +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > If SIGCONT is received while the child process is stopped, the code should
> > be CLD_CONTINUED.  If SIGCONT is recieved while the child process is in the
> > process of being stopped, it should be CLD_STOPPED.
> 
> If a process does
> 	kill (PID, SIGSTOP);
> 	<varying delay, possibly even from a different process>
> 	kill (PID, SIGCONT);
> 
> does it mean the PID's parent may get different waitid() results?
> Or even that PID will finally remain still `T (stopped)'?

Yeah, the @why part could be different with the fix.  Before the fix
the result was indeterministic.

> I do not see it has any userland impact, the
> PTRACE_ATTACH-to-T(stopped)-process is already racy for different reasons.

I agree that it wouldn't have any userland impact especially given
that the previous behavior was rather indeterministic.  It just fixes
an obvious bug which tested the wrong flag.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/