[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120425145239.GA21386@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:52:39 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such
On 04/25, Al Viro wrote:
>
> Point... Still, since we are talking about an arbitrary wide window (the
> damn thing is waiting for signals to arrive, after all) this doesn't
> sound good;
> ...
> IMO it's
> a QoI problem at the very least.
and looks confusing, agreed.
> As for SA_RESTART/!SA_RESTART mixes, if SA_RESTART comes first we should
> just take that restart and pretend that the second signal has arrived at
> the very beginning of handler, I think.
Yes. My point was, this confuses the user-space developers too. And this
case is equally unclear to me wrt should we (at least try to) change this
or not.
Oleg.
--
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