[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080220000318.6D6382700F5@magilla.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:03:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Shi Weihua <shiwh@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] signal(x86_32): Improve the signal stack overflow
check
> Shouldn't such programs use sigsetjmp/siglongjmp, which should reset the
> signal stack state?
That is not really related. The distinction doesn't really exist for
programs using the normal API (setjmp is sigsetjmp(,1)). What siglongjmp
guarantees handled is signal mask changes, not sigaltstack.
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