On Tuesday 17 May 2005 12:14, Bodo Stroesser wrote: > I didn't have the time to test the patch, but I guess, it won't work. > > Maybe, the man pages for sigsuspend are somewhat missleading, saying: > > The sigsuspend call temporarily replaces the signal mask for > the process with that given by mask and then suspends the > process until a signal is received. In fact, I assumed that was correct... > Reading the code of sys_sigsuspend() in arch/i386/kernel/signal.c, > you'll find that it will return to user only, if do_signal() returns 1. > This will happen, if there was a signal to deliver. Ignored signals > will not be delivered, so sys_sigsupend will not return on SIGWINCH, > if SIGWINCH handler is set to SIG_IGN. Doh! You're right, actually. > So, for UML's winch_handler, there is no difference between pause() > and sigsuspend(), because sigsuspend's feature of accepting a sigmask > for use while waiting, in fact isn't needed here as the same mask is > set already before with sigprocmask(). Ok, seems like I'll drop this patch. Thanks for the review. -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Skype user "PaoloGiarrusso" Linux registered user n. 292729 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7412&alloc_id=16344&op=click _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
