| To: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: unkillable process due to setup_frame() failure |
| From: | "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> |
| Date: | Wed, 7 Sep 2005 10:14:16 +0100 (BST) |
| Cc: | Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <20050906184118.GC3102@linux-mips.org> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <20050907.014234.108739386.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20050906184118.GC3102@linux-mips.org> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > So, the process can not be kill by SIGKILL. In 2.6.12, 'sigkill > > priority fix' was applied to __dequeue_signal(), but it does not help > > while the SIGTRAP is queued to tsk->pending but SIGKILL (by kill > > command) is queued to tsk->signal->shared_pending. > > The behaviour of not advancing the EPC beyond the faulting instruction is > part of the problem - but I believe that was the usual behaviour for > MIPS UNIXoid operating systems. Well, SIGKILL should always work and frankly I can't see a reason to return back to user space in the affected context in the first place. What's left in EPC shouldn't matter. Maciej |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Indy R4600 on Linux 2.6 -- possible cache issue?, Stuart Longland |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | MIPS SF toolchain, Matej Kupljen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: unkillable process due to setup_frame() failure, Ralf Baechle |
| Next by Thread: | Re: unkillable process due to setup_frame() failure, Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |