On Tuesday 01 May 2012 00:31:29 Al Viro wrote: > blackfin: no loop (== multiple signals handling is fucked); no check either > ret_from_fork doesn't handle signals, etc., userland or not. > kernel_execve doesn't handle signals, etc., success or no success > conclusion: check is probably not needed, multiple pending signals > are screwed to be honest, i haven't been following this thread as Blackfin wasn't mentioned in the initial summary. now it seems we have ;). i tried going back through this TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME thread but haven't quite got a bead on what needs to be done. seems like you're only referring to ret_from_fork here and not the normal syscall return path ? in the Blackfin case, we don't have a fork(), so we only have to handle the supervisor mode case (spawning kthreads), so i don't think we're quite as fucked as you might think :). what is it you're suggesting we add ? in the past, i found documentation on the arch TIF_*/notify requirements to be pretty much non-existent. so some parts of the Blackfin paths are what i found from my eyes bleeding x86 asm paths, and from single testing some random tests (like strace or gdb). things seem to run & be debugable, and no one has complained thus far, so we ship it! -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
