Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask

>Actually I take it the other way.  The wording is awful. But the "unless
>SA_NODEFER or SA_RESETHAND is set, and then including the signal being
>delivered".  This looks to me that it adds the signal being delivered to
>the blocked mask unless the SA_NODEFER or SA_RESETHAND is set. I kind of
>wonder if English is the native language of those that wrote this.  

So, if in doubt what is really meant - check which of the two/three/+ 
different behaviors the users out there favor most.



Jan Engelhardt
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
    • From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Bodo Stroesser <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Robert Wilkens <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Bodo Stroesser <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Robert Wilkens <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Bodo Stroesser <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Robert Wilkens <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Bodo Stroesser <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
  • Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
    • From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH] Fix i386 signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask (was: Re: Signal handling possibly wrong)
    • From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
    • From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
    • From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.13-rc6 Oops with Software RAID, LVM, JFS, NFS
• Next by Date: Re: Trouble shooting a ten minute boot delay (SiI3112)
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]