On 12/16/2017 06:20 PM, Ram Pai wrote:
Ok. Sounds like I do not have much to do. My patches in its current form will continue to work and provide the semantics you envision.
Thanks for confirming.
I'm open to a different way towards conveying this information to userspace. I don't want to probe for the behavior by sending a signal because that is quite involved and would also be visible in debuggers, confusing programmers.
I am fine with your proposal.
So how can we move this forward? Should I submit a single new patch with the new flag with a more appropriate name (PKEY_ALLOC_SIGNALINHERIT comes to my mind) and the signal inheritance change?
Dave, do you still want to wait for feedback from the x86 maintainer regarding a general interface? Is this really feasible without detailed knowledge of the XSAVE output structure? Otherwise, there probably isn't a way around code which explicitly copies the bits we want to preserve from the interrupted CPU context to the signal handler context.
Thanks, Florian -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
