Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 May 2008 21:10:56 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 02/18] flag parameters: paccept |
| |
On Tue, 6 May 2008 17:18:07 -0400 Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> wrote:
> This patch is by far the most complex in the series. It adds a new syscall > paccept. This syscall differs from accept in that it adds (at the userlevel) > two additional parameters: > > - a signal mask > - a flags value > > The flags parameter can be used to set flag like SOCK_CLOEXEC. This is > imlpemented here as well. Some people argued that this is a property > which should be inherited from the file desriptor for the server but > this is against POSIX. Additionally, we really want the signal mask > parameter as well (similar to pselect, ppoll, etc). So an interface > change in inevitable. > > The flag value is the same as for socket and socketpair. I think > diverging here will only create confusion. Similar to the filesystem > interfaces where the use of the O_* constants differs, it is acceptable > here. > > The signal mask is handled as for pselect etc. The mask is temporarily > installed for the thread and removed before the call returns. I modeled > the code after pselect. If there is a problem it's likely also in > pselect. > > For architectures which use socketcall I maintained this interface > instead of adding a system call. The symmetry shouldn't be broken. > > The following test must be adjusted for architectures other than x86 and > x86-64 and in case the syscall numbers changed.
Am getting moderately bored of these patches :(
arm exploded thusly:
net/socket.c: In function `sys_paccept': net/socket.c:1534: error: implicit declaration of function `set_restore_sigmask'
because afacit arm doesn't implement set_restore_sigmask() and nor does it need to, because it doesn't set HAVE_SET_RESTORE_SIGMASK.
I will continue to fumble along in the rc2-mm1 direction. Fixes against that kernel would suit, thanks.
| |