Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:32:38 -0700 | Subject | Re: avr32: handle_signal() bug? | From | Håvard Skinnemoen <> |
| |
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 2:57 AM, Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 22:55 -0700, Håvard Skinnemoen wrote: >> /root # ./nodefer >> SIGUSR2: not blocked >> SIGTERM: not blocked > > Hmm.. that's interesting. I had a quick look through the rest of the > code in the signal path and couldn't find anything obviously wrong. The > only thing that looked suspicious is that you don't clear > TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK if you successsfully deliver a signal. Maybe try > adding a clear_thread_flag(TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK); to the success path in > handle_signal() and see if you get better results? See the x86 > implementation for more details.
Yeah, probably worth a try. I wonder if I should take the opportunity to make the signal handling code look more like x86. There's no good reason to be different, really, other than a natural tendency to drift apart over time.
>> On my desktop, it behaves as expected: >> >> $ ./nodefer-pc >> SIGUSR2: blocked >> SIGTERM: blocked >> >> Your patch doesn't appear to do any harm though, and it looks correct >> to me. Perhaps there's another bug lurking somewhere as well. Some >> preliminary debugging makes me suspicious about libc, but I can't tell >> for sure yet. > > Which libc is this by the way?
uClibc-0.9.30. Dang, I thought I was running 0.9.31...I recall fixing several nasty bugs between those two versions, so perhaps I should upgrade it and see if it helps.
Havard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |