Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Date | Sat, 1 Dec 2018 00:12:53 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] signal: add procfd_signal() syscall |
| |
On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 12:05 AM Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:26 PM Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io> wrote: > > On December 1, 2018 11:09:58 AM GMT+13:00, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > > One humble point I would like to make is that what I care about most is a sensible way forward without having to redo essential parts of how syscalls work. > > I don't want to introduce a sane, small syscall that ends up breaking all over the place because we decided to fix past mistakes that technically have nothing to do with the patch itself. > > However, I do sympathize and understand these concerns. > > IMHO, it's fine to just replicate all the splits we have for the > existing signal system calls. It's ugly, but once it's done, it'll be > done for a long time. I can't see a need to add even more signal > system calls after this one.
We definitely need waitid_time64() and rt_sigtimedwait_time64() in the very near future.
Arnd
| |