On 10/06, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > The patch (that I sent out as part of v5 patchset) uses per task > pending sigqueue and start queueing the signals when the task > singlesteps. After completion of singlestep, walks thro the pending > signals. Yes, I see. Doesn't look very nice ;) > But I was thinking if I should block signals instead of queueing them in > a different sigqueue. So Idea is to block signals just before the task > enables singlestep and unblock after task disables singlestep. Agreed, this looks much, much better. In both cases the task is current, it is safe to change ->blocked. But please avoid sigprocmask(), we have set_current_blocked(). Oleg. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>