signals: kill block_all_signals() and unblock_all_signals()
Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]Versions newest first
- v1 Latest1 patch 3 repliesIn review
Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet
| # | Subject and files | Size | Replies | Applied |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1/1 | signals: kill block_all_signals() and unblock_all_signals()drivers/ include/ include/ +1 more | +2 | 3 replies |
Reviews trailers per patch
The patch has a Reviewed-by or Acked-by.
| Patch | Daniel Vetter | Dave Airlie |
|---|---|---|
| 1/1 | A-b | A-b |
Trailers given in replies are filled; those carried in the patches from earlier versions are outlined with dashes.
Cover letter [PATCH 0/1] signals: kill block_all_signals() and unblock_all_signals()
Quoted 14 lines · Dave Airlie
Quoted 12 lines · Oleg Nesterov
Quoted 2 lines · Richard Weinberger
Is this functionality still in use/needed?
All I can say it doesn't work.
Quoted 2 lines
Otherwise we could get rid of
block_all_signals()and unpuzzle the signaling code a bit. :-)Yes. I do not even remember when I reported this the first time. Perhaps more than 10 years ago.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
See the last attempt in 2011: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/12/263
I copied this email below.Dave. Lets finally kill this horror? I am going to send a patch unless you stop me ;)
There were follow up on that thread 4 years ago, but we are probably at the stage where this thing can die,
Heh.
I tried to kill this horror so many years, and forgot to send the patch after you finally blessed it ;)
Could you please review?
Quoted 2 lines
I suspect any hw using it has died out, and any new hardware won't be doing evil things with drm locks
even if it does, let me repeat that block_all_signals() simply do not work. At all. if ->notifier() returns 0, this thread will burn CPU until SIGCONT or SIGKILL. Or it will stop anyway if multi-threaded.
Oleg.