Searched hist:"91 d44ff8" (Results 1 – 7 of 7) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/linux/arch/um/drivers/ |
| H A D | ubd.h | 91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
|
| H A D | ubd_user.c | 91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
|
| H A D | ubd_kern.c | 91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
|
| /openbmc/linux/arch/um/os-Linux/ |
| H A D | util.c | 91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
|
| H A D | sigio.c | 91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
|
| H A D | process.c | 91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
|
| /openbmc/linux/arch/um/include/shared/ |
| H A D | os.h | 91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
91d44ff8 Sun Aug 18 06:30:08 CDT 2013 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> um: Cleanup SIGTERM handling
Richard reported that some UML processes survive if the UML
main process receives a SIGTERM.
This issue was caused by a wrongly placed signal(SIGTERM, SIG_DFL)
in init_new_thread_signals().
It disabled the UML exit handler accidently for some processes.
The correct solution is to disable the fatal handler for all
UML helper threads/processes.
Such that last_ditch_exit() does not get called multiple times
and all processes can exit due to SIGTERM.
Reported-and-tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
|