Re: [PATCH 1/4] fanotify: flush outstanding perm requests on group destroy

[Andreas Gruenbacher]

On Tuesday 24 August 2010 10:49:45 Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> I think just switching to interruptible sleep in
> fanotify_get_response_from_access should be fine. And it should probably
> deny the current event when signal is received.

Well the result would be -EINTR from the system call that blocked on the
perm event, the same as with an interruptible nfs mount.  The process would 
never get -EPERM.  Processes may
not be prepared to handle -EINTR in all cases, and so it may make more sense
to use the same behavior as NFS and only allow SIGKILL to kill a process 
blocked on a perm event (which the blocked process will never see).

>From the nfs man page:
> intr / nointr
> 
> Selects whether to allow signals to interrupt file operations on this mount
> point.  If neither option is specified (or if nointr is specified),
> signals do not interrupt NFS file operations.  If intr is  specified, 
> system  calls return EINTR if an in-progress NFS operation is interrupted
> by a signal.
> 
> Using  the  intr option is preferred to using the soft option because it is
> significantly less likely to result in data corruption.  The intr / nointr
> mount option is deprecated  after  kernel  2.6.25.   Only SIGKILL  can 
> interrupt  a  pending  NFS operation on these kernels, and if specified,
> this mount option is ignored to provide backwards  compatibility with
> older kernels.

Andreas
--
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/