Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 25 Aug 2011 18:15:56 +0100 | | From | Will Deacon <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 03/43] arm: Use set_current_blocked() and block_sigmask() |
| |
Hi Matt,
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 05:46:19PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: > From: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@linux.intel.com> > > As described in e6fa16ab ("signal: sigprocmask() should do > retarget_shared_pending()") the modification of current->blocked is > incorrect as we need to check for shared signals we're about to block. > > Also, use the new helper function block_sigmask() which centralises > the code for updating current->blocked after successfully delivering a > signal and reduces the amount of duplicate code across > architectures. In the past some architectures got this code wrong, so > using this helper function should stop that from happening again. > > Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> > Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@linaro.org> > Cc: Dave Martin <dave.martin@linaro.org> > Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@linux.intel.com> > --- > > v2 of this patch depends on "[PATCH 01/43] signal: Add block_sigmask() > for adding sigmask to current->blocked" so they need to go through the > same tree but this patch would benefit from some maintainer ACK's. > > Will, I dropped your Acked-by because I felt this patch changed quite > dramatically since v1 and warrants another review. I hope that's OK.
Ok. Looks like the only change from v1 is calling block_sigmask. which does what was previously done inline (in v1).
So you can keep my ack if you like!
Will
|  |