Re: [PATCH v2] signal: Adjust error codes according to restore_user_sigmask()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I think you are misunderstanding what I said. You are taking things
out of context. I was saying here what I did was inspired by why the
syscall was designed to begin with. The syscall below refers to
epoll_wait and not epoll_pwait.

-Deepa

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 7:19 AM Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 05/23, Deepa Dinamani wrote:
> >
> > 1. block the signals you don't care about.
> > 2. syscall()
> > 3. unblock the signals blocked in 1.
>
> and even this part of your email is very confusing. because in this case
> we can never miss a signal. I'd say
>
>         1. block the signals you don't care about
>         2. unblock the signals which should interrupt the syscall below
>         3. syscall()
>         4. block the signals unblocked in 2.
>
> Oleg.
>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux