From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752410Ab2KRSqI (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:46:08 -0500 Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]:56069 "EHLO mail-wi0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752073Ab2KRSqG (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:46:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20121118054510.GE16916@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20121016223508.GR2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20121017160702.GY2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20121017161953.GZ2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20121115215529.GU2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20121118054510.GE16916@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:45:43 -1000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: MY0sxc18bkbQAUz7mPMCgAX-kOQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: sigaltstack fun (was Re: new execve/kernel_thread design) To: Al Viro Cc: Michal Simek , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > Linus, do you have any objections to the above? FWIW, I've a tentative > patchset in that direction (most of it from the last cycle); right now > it + stuff currently in signal.git#for-next is at -3.4KLoC and I hadn't > dealt with the biarch side of things yet... I have absolutely no objections. sigaltstack has always been kind of messy, and made worse by the fact that it gets effectively no testing (because it's generally not used by normal code and even code that uses it tends to use it only for very uncommon events). So forcing all the sigaltstack code into generic code and at least avoiding the "different architectures can get things subtly - or not so subtly - wrong in different ways" sounds like a good thing. Linus