| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:53:33 -0800 (PST) From: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com> To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, systemtap <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>, DLE <dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 3/3] Add get_signal tracepoint This is orthogonal to the core-dump tracepoint, I don't see why you call them a unified patch series. The proper name for this event is "signal delivery". But since the proper name for "send_signal" is "signal generation", I suppose "get" is analogously improper to the existing "send" tracepoint. ;-) Especially if you call this "get" rather than "deliver", there is another place that should invoke this tracepoint (or perhaps a third one). sys_rt_sigtimedwait "gets" a signal without delivering it. In POSIX terminology this is called "accepting" the signal: the three things that can happen in the life of a signal are "generate", "deliver", and "accept". If you are trying to match up what happened to a signal generated by kill() or whatnot, then you want to notice both delivery and acceptance as the complementary event. (And again I have no clue why this signal stuff should be called "sched" at all.) Thanks, Roland -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists