Re: [RFC + PATCH] signalfd simplification

2007-09-02 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > We can optimize this later, using a "clever" wait_queue_func_t if needed. Good idea. Will do ... - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at

Re: [RFC + PATCH] signalfd simplification

2007-09-02 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 09/02, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > Small problem: unless I missed something, signalfd_deliver() and > sys_signalfd() > should use wake_up_all(), not wake_up() which implies nr_exclusive == 1. > > It is possible that we have multiple threads waiting on ->signalfd_wqh with > the the different ->sig

Re: [RFC + PATCH] signalfd simplification

2007-09-02 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 09/01, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > I'm playing at the moment with this patch, that recall Ben's idea of > attaching to the sighand only during read/poll, and calling dequeue_signal() > only with "current". This simplifies the signalfd logic quite a bit. > If this patch is applied, a task calling