On 8/12/05, Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Chris Wright wrote: > > * Jan Engelhardt ([email protected]) wrote: > > > So, if in doubt what is really meant - check which of the two/three/+ > > > different behaviors the users out there favor most. > > > > Rather, check what happens in practice on other implementations. I don't > > have Solaris, HP-UX, Irix, AIX, etc. boxen at hand, but some folks must. > > > > I've supplied this before, but I'll send it again. Attached is a program > that should show the behavior of the sigaction. If someone has one of the > above mentioned boxes, please run this on the box and send back the > results. > I've got a 4-way pSeries p550 running AIX 5.3 here : $ uname -s -M -p -v -r AIX 3 5 powerpc IBM,9113-550 Output from your program : $ ./a.out Unknown return code!! Unknown return code!! Unknown return code!! Unknown return code!! Unknown return code!! Unknown return code!! sa_mask blocks sig -- Jesper Juhl <[email protected]> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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: 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
- References:
- 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]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/8] netpoll: various bugfixes
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC][patch 0/2] mm: remove PageReserved
- 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):