On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 02:03:32PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > > I have absolutely no objections. sigaltstack has always been kind of > > messy, and made worse by the fact that it gets effectively no testing > > (because it's generally not used by normal code and even code that > > uses it tends to use it only for very uncommon events). So forcing all > > the sigaltstack code into generic code and at least avoiding the > > "different architectures can get things subtly - or not so subtly - > > wrong in different ways" sounds like a good thing. > > FWIW, if folks are looking for testcases there are a small number in > glibc, a quick grep shows: > > nptl/tst-cancel20.c > nptl/tst-cancel21.c > nptl/tst-signal6.c > debug/tst-longjmp_chk2.c > > LTP probably has a bunch too. Might be a good idea to start adding tests/* in the kernel tree, perhaps? Ones in glibc had been present prior to the LGPLv3 clusterfuck, by the look of it... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
