On Tue 04-10-16 18:13:05, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/04, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Fri 30-09-16 14:47:41, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > On 09/30, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > @@ -423,7 +424,9 @@ static int coredump_wait(int exit_code, struct 
> > > > core_state *core_state)
> > > >         if (core_waiters > 0) {
> > > >                 struct core_thread *ptr;
> > > >
> > > > +               freezer_do_not_count();
> > > >                 wait_for_completion(&core_state->startup);
> > > > +               freezer_count();
> > >
> > > Agreed... we could probably even do
> > >
> > >   --- x/fs/coredump.c
> > >   +++ x/fs/coredump.c
> > >   @@ -423,7 +423,13 @@ static int coredump_wait(int exit_code, 
> > >           if (core_waiters > 0) {
> > >                   struct core_thread *ptr;
> > >    
> > >   -               wait_for_completion(&core_state->startup);
> > >   +               if 
> > > (wait_for_completion_interruptible(&core_state->startup)) {
> > >   +                       /* see the comment in dump_interrupted() */
> > >   +                       down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> > >   +                       coredump_finish(mm, false);
> > >   +                       up_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> > >   +                       return -EINTR;
> > >   +               }
> > >                   /*
> > >                    * Wait for all the threads to become inactive, so that
> > >                    * all the thread context (extended register state, like
> >
> > This looks like a very good idea to me. We really want to make the whole
> > coredump_wait killable.
> 
> Well, it is already killable. 

Except wait_for_completion is not killable and the exiting tasks might
be blocked in a !killable state blocking this one to continue. But...

> And with the change above it can sleep
> in down_write(mmap_sem) and we really need this lock to abort, so it
> won't necessarily react to SIGKILL faster.

you are right that somebody might be holding mmap_sem and we cannot get
rid of it here.

> > I guess this should help us to remove the
> > hackish sig->flags & SIGNAL_GROUP_COREDUMP check from
> > __task_will_free_mem.
> 
> Why? This doesn't depend on "killable". __task_will_free_mem() checks
> this flag to detect the CLONE_VM processes which won't exit soon because
> they participate in the coredumping.

I just (wrongly) assumed that if we make this path killable completely
we can guarantee a forward progress and get rid of SIGNAL_GROUP_COREDUMP
check completely. But you are right this won't be sufficient.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Reply via email to