[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47BB7922.1010400@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:49:38 +0800
From: Shi Weihua <shiwh@...fujitsu.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] signal(x86_32): Improve the signal stack overflow
check
Roland McGrath wrote::
> This change looks bogus to me. Before I get to the content, there is a nit
> that annoys me. You changed the punctuation in my comment so that it no
> longer means what it did, and now the comment is nonsensical. I don't
> demand decent English from hackers of any linguistic bent, but please don't
> louse up the coherent sentences I wrote when moving them down ten lines.
>
> Please elaborate on the rationale that justifies this change.
> I don't see it at all.
I have corrected the comment in the latest patch which has been apllied by Ingo.
Please refer to http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/18/575 and http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/19/119 .
Thanks.
Shi Weihua
>
> If you are already on the signal stack, it doesn't matter whether the
> signal that just arrived has SA_ONSTACK set or not. If you are going to
> overflow the stack with the new signal frame, we want to prevent that
> clobberation regardless.
>
>
> 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