lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Dec]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] signal: add procfd_signal() syscall
On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 12:05 AM Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:26 PM Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io> wrote:
> > On December 1, 2018 11:09:58 AM GMT+13:00, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> >
> > One humble point I would like to make is that what I care about most is a sensible way forward without having to redo essential parts of how syscalls work.
> > I don't want to introduce a sane, small syscall that ends up breaking all over the place because we decided to fix past mistakes that technically have nothing to do with the patch itself.
> > However, I do sympathize and understand these concerns.
>
> IMHO, it's fine to just replicate all the splits we have for the
> existing signal system calls. It's ugly, but once it's done, it'll be
> done for a long time. I can't see a need to add even more signal
> system calls after this one.

We definitely need waitid_time64() and rt_sigtimedwait_time64()
in the very near future.

Arnd

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-12-01 00:14    [W:0.074 / U:5.736 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site