Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/4] set_restore_sigmask TIF_SIGPENDING | From | David Woodhouse <> | Date | Wed, 09 Apr 2008 19:40:33 +0100 |
| |
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 20:22 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 04/09, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > > One of the supposed advantages of TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK in the first > > place, iirc, was that it allowed us to return a result code other than > > -EINTR as _well_ as restoring the signal mask. > > Agreed, good point. ERESTART_ is not that flexible. > > Somehow I assumed we will never need something "special" here, this is > not very clever.
Well, it's not clear that we _will_ need it to be so special. You could perhaps argue that it's overengineering. It's just that at the time I did it, I _thought_ I'd need it for ppoll().
It's only in later optimisations that I realised we only ever really needed to use TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK in the case where ppoll() or pselect() was interrupted.
-- dwmw2
| |