From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] signal: Teach sigsuspend to use set_user_sigmask Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:55:49 +0200 Message-ID: <20190611185548.GA31214@redhat.com> References: <20190522032144.10995-1-deepa.kernel@gmail.com> <20190529161157.GA27659@redhat.com> <20190604134117.GA29963@redhat.com> <20190606140814.GA13440@redhat.com> <87k1dxaxcl.fsf_-_@xmission.com> <87ef45axa4.fsf_-_@xmission.com> <20190610162244.GB8127@redhat.com> <87lfy96sta.fsf@xmission.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87lfy96sta.fsf@xmission.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Andrew Morton , Deepa Dinamani , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, dbueso@suse.de, axboe@kernel.dk, dave@stgolabs.net, e@80x24.org, jbaron@akamai.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org, omar.kilani@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, Al Viro , Linus Torvalds , David Laight , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On 06/10, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Personally I don't think anyone sane would intentionally depend on this > and I don't think there is a sufficiently reliable way to depend on this > by accident that people would actually be depending on it. Agreed. As I said I like these changes and I see nothing wrong. To me they fix the current behaviour, or at least make it more consistent. But perhaps this should be documented in the changelog? To make it clear that this change was intentional. Oleg.