[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/4] set_restore_sigmask TIF_SIGPENDING
Roland, Linus, I'm sorry for being offtopic, but there is something
I can't understand from the very beginning, when TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK
was introduced.

On 03/28, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, Roland McGrath wrote:
> >
> > Set TIF_SIGPENDING in set_restore_sigmask. This lets arch code take
> > TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK out of the set of bits that will be noticed on
> > return to user mode. On some machines those bits are scarce, and we
> > can free this unneeded one up for other uses.
> Hmm. That probably means that TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK shouldn't be a "TIF"
> flag at all,


> but a "TS" ("thread status") flag.

Why do we need any flag? It looks a bit ugly. Isn't it better to introduce
the new magic ERESTART_XXX which means ERESTARTNOHAND + restore-sigmask ?

We only need this flag as an implicit parameter to the arch dependent do_signal()
which we can't call directly, and thus it must imply TIF_SIGPENDING, and it
is not valid after do_signal() (should be cleared). This all looks like
ERESTART_ magic, why should we add something else ?

See also

Of course, probably it is too late to change the implementation even if
I am right, the question is: what I am missed?


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-08 14:33    [W:0.099 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site