From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 05:10:02 +0000
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:27:24PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Applied, thanks.
>
> Hmm... There's something odd going on with {rt_,}sigaction on sparc -
> we *do* have sa_restorer in struct sigaction and struct old_sigaction,
> but it's not used for anything whatsoever. There's also a separately
> passed restorer pointer for rt_sigaction() and *that* is used instead,
> but not reported via *oact.
>
> What's the reason for that weirdness? I understand why we do that on
> alpha (we have no sa_restorer in struct sigaction we'd inherited from
> OSF/1), but sparc always had perfectly normal sigaction->sa_restorer
> field all along - even for old sigaction(2)...
I have no idea how things got this way.
In the old sigaction() we do use the sa_restorer, and for both RT and
non-RT sigaction, we do fill in the sa_restorer member for the old
sigaction returned.
This special 'restorer' argument overrides the sigaction one.
GLIBC wraps calls to this system call, see:
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sparc/sparc32/sigaction.c
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sparc/sparc64/sigaction.c
I wish I had more context and info, but I don't :-(
--
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
