Re: [2.6.27.24] Kernel coredump to a pipe is failing

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 05/27, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > Actually, I think there is a strong reason to handle signals during
> > core dumping. The coredump can take a lot of time/resources, not good
> > it looks like unkillable procees to users.
>
> One problem with that is if you send a process a string of signals that cause
> a core dump and then kill. In the old case you would just get a full core dump
> on the first signal and be done. With your change it would process
> the second signal too and stop the dumping and you get none or a partial
> core dump. That might well break existing setups.

I don't think we should worry about this particular case. Suppose a user
does

	kill(pid, SIGQUIT);
	kill(pid, SIGKILL);

In this case, most likely the core dump will not start. Because SIGKILL
will set SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT before the process dequeues SIGQUIT and start
do_coredump() which checks signal_group_exit() in zap_threads().

But yes, I agree, this change is user-visible and should be discussed.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/