[lkml]   [2019]   [Jun]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: [RFC PATCH 1/5] signal: Teach sigsuspend to use set_user_sigmask
From: Oleg Nesterov []
> Sent: 11 June 2019 19:56
> On 06/10, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >
> > Personally I don't think anyone sane would intentionally depend on this
> > and I don't think there is a sufficiently reliable way to depend on this
> > by accident that people would actually be depending on it.
> Agreed.
> As I said I like these changes and I see nothing wrong. To me they fix the
> current behaviour, or at least make it more consistent.
> But perhaps this should be documented in the changelog? To make it clear
> that this change was intentional.

What happens if you run the test program I posted yesterday after the changes?

It looks like pselect() and epoll_pwait() operated completely differently.
pselect() would always calls the signal handlers.
epoll_pwait() only calls them when EINTR is returned.
So changing epoll_pwait() and pselect() to work the same way
is bound to break some applications.


Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-06-12 10:41    [W:0.137 / U:5.512 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site