Re: [PATCH 2/4] exit: support non-blocking pidfds
From: Christian Brauner <hidden>
Date: 2020-09-01 16:19:35
Also in:
linux-kselftest, lkml
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 06:11:54PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 08/31, Christian Brauner wrote:quoted
--- a/kernel/exit.c +++ b/kernel/exit.c@@ -934,6 +934,7 @@ struct wait_opts { wait_queue_entry_t child_wait; int notask_error; + int eagain_error; }; static int eligible_pid(struct wait_opts *wo, struct task_struct *p)@@ -1461,6 +1462,8 @@ static long do_wait(struct wait_opts *wo) notask: retval = wo->notask_error; + if (!retval) + retval = wo->eagain_error; if (!retval && !(wo->wo_flags & WNOHANG)) { retval = -ERESTARTSYS;I must have missed something but I don't understand why do we need the new ->eagain_error and the change in do_wait().quoted
@@ -1544,6 +1551,11 @@ static long kernel_waitid(int which, pid_t upid, struct waitid_info *infop, wo.wo_flags = options; wo.wo_info = infop; wo.wo_rusage = ru; + wo.eagain_error = 0; + if (f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) { + wo.wo_flags |= WNOHANG; + wo.eagain_error = -EAGAIN; + } ret = do_wait(&wo);Can't kernel_waitid() simply do if (f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) wo.wo_flags |= WNOHANG; ret = do_wait(); if (!ret & (f_flags & O_NONBLOCK)) ret = -EAGAIN; ?
Heh, indeed, that's even a smaller patch. Will change to that! Thanks for the review, Oleg! Christia