diff options
| author | Eric W. Biederman | 2019-05-15 19:33:50 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Eric W. Biederman | 2019-05-27 16:36:28 +0200 |
| commit | 72abe3bcf0911d69b46c1e8bdb5612675e0ac42c (patch) | |
| tree | bc58a66232ffdd0fa0f28cd100df9808620074ee /arch/um | |
| parent | signal/pid_namespace: Fix reboot_pid_ns to use send_sig not force_sig (diff) | |
| download | kernel-qcow2-linux-72abe3bcf0911d69b46c1e8bdb5612675e0ac42c.tar.gz kernel-qcow2-linux-72abe3bcf0911d69b46c1e8bdb5612675e0ac42c.tar.xz kernel-qcow2-linux-72abe3bcf0911d69b46c1e8bdb5612675e0ac42c.zip | |
signal/cifs: Fix cifs_put_tcp_session to call send_sig instead of force_sig
The locking in force_sig_info is not prepared to deal with a task that
exits or execs (as sighand may change). The is not a locking problem
in force_sig as force_sig is only built to handle synchronous
exceptions.
Further the function force_sig_info changes the signal state if the
signal is ignored, or blocked or if SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE will prevent the
delivery of the signal. The signal SIGKILL can not be ignored and can
not be blocked and SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE won't prevent it from being
delivered.
So using force_sig rather than send_sig for SIGKILL is confusing
and pointless.
Because it won't impact the sending of the signal and and because
using force_sig is wrong, replace force_sig with send_sig.
Cc: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Cc: Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>
Fixes: a5c3e1c725af ("Revert "cifs: No need to send SIGKILL to demux_thread during umount"")
Fixes: e7ddee9037e7 ("cifs: disable sharing session and tcon and add new TCP sharing code")
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch/um')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions