Re: unkillable process due to setup_frame() failure

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

 



>>>>> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 23:44:13 +0900 (JST), Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:

anemo> So my "which is preferred" question was inappropriate.  I had
anemo> to ask "#1 or #2 or both or other ?"

In 2.6.14-rc1, another fix is done in arch/i386/kernel/entry.S.
It also fixes a race condition in signal delivery.

>    [PATCH] i386: Don't miss pending signals returning to user mode after signal processing
>    
>    Signed-off-by: Roland McGrath <roland@xxxxxxxxxx>

Let's follow.

--- linux-mips/arch/mips/kernel/entry.S	2005-03-04 22:17:29.000000000 +0900
+++ linux/arch/mips/kernel/entry.S	2005-09-16 01:04:52.365022536 +0900
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@
 	move	a0, sp
 	li	a1, 0
 	jal	do_notify_resume	# a2 already loaded
-	j	restore_all
+	j	resume_userspace
 
 FEXPORT(syscall_exit_work_partial)
 	SAVE_STATIC

---
Atsushi Nemoto


[Index of Archives]     [Linux MIPS Home]     [LKML Archive]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux]     [Git]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]

  Powered by Linux