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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:39:32 +0100 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com> Cc: "lkml, " <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, Dinakar Guniguntala <dino@...ibm.com>, "Stultz, John" <johnstul@...ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: futex: make futex_lock_pi interruptible On Tuesday 27 October 2009, Darren Hart wrote: > The following C test case demonstrates how this patch could be used to > implement interruptible locking. There is an awful lot of debug code and > some other relics of a hacked together test in there now, but if anyone > wanted to test the futex changes, this will do the trick. > Your test program uses a signal handler to interrupt the mutex. If you are using a signal handler already to implement a user space mutex_cancel, why can't you just do a longjmp out of the signal handler rather than modifying the kernel? Arnd <>< -- 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