lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] staging: r8188eu: don't accept SIGTERM for cmd thread
Hi Fabio and all,

Thus wrote Fabio M. De Francesco (fmdefrancesco@gmail.com):

> On Sunday, October 17, 2021 12:29:02 PM CEST Phillip Potter wrote:

> > So I myself am a little confused on this one :-)

> > Based on my understanding, so correct me if I'm wrong, a process
> > (kthread or otherwise) can still be killed if marked TASK_KILLABLE,
> > even if ignoring SIGTERM. Indeed, from a userspace perspective,
> > SIGKILL is unblockable anyway - although of course kernel code can
> > choose how to respond to it.

> Correct.

And it seems that by default, a kthread can't be killed with SIGKILL.

> > So in other words, the kthread could still be killed while waiting
> > in the wait_for_completion_killable() call, even if we are ignoring
> > SIGTERM. From that perspective I guess, it is therefore not 'incorrect' as
> > such - if indeed we wanted that behaviour.

> No. This misunderstandings is my fault. :(

> In Martin's patch I read "SIGTERM" but for some reason I thought he was
> talking of "SIGKILL".

> At the moment, without Martin's patch, the kthread can be terminated by the
> command "kill -TERM <PID>". If we try "kill -KILL <PID>", nothing happens.
> This is because only "allow_signal(SIGTERM);" is present in the code.

Exactly. And this is probably not by intention. It would be consistent
to either allow both or none - the latter makes more sense, and it's
what most other drivers do.

> I think that kthreads must also allow SIGKILL with "allow_signal(SIGKILL);"
> for allowing root to make them terminate.

Probably. nfsd seems to do this.

> For what relates to my patch, it doesn't matter if I either leave
> wait_for_completion_killable() as-is or change it to wait_for_completion().
> This is because at the moment SIGKILL cannot kill rtw_cmd_thread(), while
> SIGTERM can.

> However, for consistency, I should better change it to the uninterruptible
> version.

That makes sense to me.

Let's see what Greg and others say...

Best regards,
Martin

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-10-17 20:03    [W:0.065 / U:1.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site