Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 Apr 2012 16:39:15 +1000 | From | Greg Ungerer <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such |
| |
On 30/04/12 08:51, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:34:13PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 09:14:53PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 20:45, Al Viro<viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote: >>>>> The only comment I have, >>>>> 38671a3e831ed7327affb24d715f98bb99c80e56 m68k: add TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME and handle it >>>>> forgets to unexport do_signal(). >>>> >>>> Meh... ??The thing is, there are _two_ of them. ??signal_mm.c and signal_no.c >>>> badly need merging, with common stuff moved to signal.c. ??I really hate >>> >>> Greg recently posted a patch to merge them: >>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-m68k/msg04995.html >> >> Nice... BTW, could you comment on >> m68k: don't open-code block_sigmask() >> m68k: use set_current_blocked in sigreturn/rt_sigreturn >> m68k-nommu: do_signal() is only called when returning to user mode >> m68k: add TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME and handle it. >> in signal.git tree? The last one is really interesting... >> >> Just pick the current tree - one that was there yesterday had a dumb typo >> in thread_info.h part, so it wouldn't even compile (TIF_NOTIFE_RESUME >> defined instead of TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME ;-/) > > BTW, Greg's patch put into the queue in the very beginning, everything rebased > on top of it.
Those changes currently sitting in your signal tree look ok to me.
Acked-by: Greg Ungerer <gerg@uclinux.org>
Regards Greg
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: gerg@snapgear.com SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888 8 Gardner Close FAX: +61 7 3217 5323 Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com
| |