OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » Remaining straight forward kthread API conversions...
Re: [PATCH] md: Remove broken SIGKILL support [message #18574 is a reply to message #18315] Tue, 01 May 2007 06:13 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
ebiederm is currently offline  ebiederm
Messages: 1354
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> writes:

> On Thursday April 19, ebiederm@xmission.com wrote:
>> From: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
>> 
>> Currently md_thread calls allow_signal so it can receive a
>> SIGKILL but then does nothing with it except flush the
>> sigkill so that it not can use an interruptible sleep.
>> 
>> This whole dance is silly so remove the unnecessary
>> and broken signal handling logic.
>
> (sorry of the delay in replying)
>
> You missed some related code which should help you see that it is -
> maybe - not completely 'silly' (though I confess it might be slightly
> broken).
> In md_check_recovery:
>
> 	if (signal_pending(current)) {
> 		if (mddev->pers->sync_request) {
> 			printk(KERN_INFO "md: %s in immediate safe mode\n",
> 			       mdname(mddev));
> 			mddev->safemode = 2;
> 		}
> 		flush_signals(current);
> 	}

Thanks.

> The idea is that alt-sysrq-K will send SIGKILL to all processes
> including the md support threads, which will cause them to enter
> "immediate safe mode" so that the metadata will be marked clean
> immediately at every opportunity.  That way you can use alt-sysrq:
>   sync,unmount,kill,reboot
> and be fairly sure that you md array will be shut down cleanly.
>
> I'd be just as happy to link this into Unmount (aka
> do_emergency_remount), but that doesn't seem at all straight forward,
> and in any case should be done before the current code is ripped out.
>
> While we do have a reboot_notifier which tries to stop all arrays,
> I've never been comfortable with that.  A reboot really should just
> reboot... 
>
> What I would REALLY like is for the block device to know whether it is
> open read-only or read-write.  Then I could mark it clean when it
> becomes read-only as would happen when do_emergency_remount remounts
> it read-only.
>
> I might see how hard that would be...

My goal to get signals to kernel threads out of the user space interface
especially for non-privileged processes, so everything that we do with
kernel threads can just be an unimportant implementation detail to user
space.

Eric
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [patch i2o] i2o layer cleanup
Next Topic: [PATCH] Make common helpers for seq_files that work with list_head-s
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Aug 04 22:08:42 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.29931 seconds