From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Walt Drummond <walt@drummond.us>
Cc: aacraid@microsemi.com, anna.schumaker@netapp.com, arnd@arndb.de,
bsegall@google.com, bp@alien8.de, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
bristot@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
dwmw2@infradead.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
dinguyen@kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, hpa@zytor.com, idryomov@gmail.com,
mingo@redhat.com, yzaikin@google.com, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru,
jejb@linux.ibm.com, jmorris@namei.org, bfields@fieldses.org,
jlayton@kernel.org, jirislaby@kernel.org,
john.johansen@canonical.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
keescook@chromium.org, mcgrof@kernel.org,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, mattst88@gmail.com, mgorman@suse.de,
oleg@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
rth@twiddle.net, richard@nod.at, serge@hallyn.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] signals: Support more than 64 signals
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 18:48:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YdNE6UXRT02135Pd@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220103181956.983342-1-walt@drummond.us>
On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 10:19:48AM -0800, Walt Drummond wrote:
> This patch set expands the number of signals in Linux beyond the
> current cap of 64. It sets a new cap at the somewhat arbitrary limit
> of 1024 signals, both because it’s what GLibc and MUSL support and
> because many architectures pad sigset_t or ucontext_t in the kernel to
> this cap. This limit is not fixed and can be further expanded within
> reason.
Could you explain the point of the entire exercise? Why do we need more
rt signals in the first place?
glibc has quite a bit of utterly pointless future-proofing. So "they
allow more" is not a good reason - not without a plausible use-case,
at least.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Walt Drummond <walt@drummond.us>
Cc: aacraid@microsemi.com, anna.schumaker@netapp.com, arnd@arndb.de,
bsegall@google.com, bp@alien8.de, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
bristot@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
dwmw2@infradead.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
dinguyen@kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, hpa@zytor.com, idryomov@gmail.com,
mingo@redhat.com, yzaikin@google.com, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru,
jejb@linux.ibm.com, jmorris@namei.org, bfields@fieldses.org,
jlayton@kernel.org, jirislaby@kernel.org,
john.johansen@canonical.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
keescook@chromium.org, mcgrof@kernel.org,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, mattst88@gmail.com, mgorman@suse.de,
oleg@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
rth@twiddle.net, richard@nod.at, serge@hallyn.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, tglx@linu
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] signals: Support more than 64 signals
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 18:48:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YdNE6UXRT02135Pd@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220103181956.983342-1-walt@drummond.us>
On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 10:19:48AM -0800, Walt Drummond wrote:
> This patch set expands the number of signals in Linux beyond the
> current cap of 64. It sets a new cap at the somewhat arbitrary limit
> of 1024 signals, both because it’s what GLibc and MUSL support and
> because many architectures pad sigset_t or ucontext_t in the kernel to
> this cap. This limit is not fixed and can be further expanded within
> reason.
Could you explain the point of the entire exercise? Why do we need more
rt signals in the first place?
glibc has quite a bit of utterly pointless future-proofing. So "they
allow more" is not a good reason - not without a plausible use-case,
at least.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Walt Drummond <walt@drummond.us>
Cc: aacraid@microsemi.com, anna.schumaker@netapp.com, arnd@arndb.de,
bsegall@google.com, bp@alien8.de, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
bristot@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
dwmw2@infradead.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
dinguyen@kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, hpa@zytor.com, idryomov@gmail.com,
mingo@redhat.com, yzaikin@google.com, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru,
jejb@linux.ibm.com, jmorris@namei.org, bfields@fieldses.org,
jlayton@kernel.org, jirislaby@kernel.org,
john.johansen@canonical.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
keescook@chromium.org, mcgrof@kernel.org,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, mattst88@gmail.com, mgorman@suse.de,
oleg@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
rth@twiddle.net, richard@nod.at, serge@hallyn.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] signals: Support more than 64 signals
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 18:48:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YdNE6UXRT02135Pd@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220103181956.983342-1-walt@drummond.us>
On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 10:19:48AM -0800, Walt Drummond wrote:
> This patch set expands the number of signals in Linux beyond the
> current cap of 64. It sets a new cap at the somewhat arbitrary limit
> of 1024 signals, both because it’s what GLibc and MUSL support and
> because many architectures pad sigset_t or ucontext_t in the kernel to
> this cap. This limit is not fixed and can be further expanded within
> reason.
Could you explain the point of the entire exercise? Why do we need more
rt signals in the first place?
glibc has quite a bit of utterly pointless future-proofing. So "they
allow more" is not a good reason - not without a plausible use-case,
at least.
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-03 19:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-03 18:19 [RFC PATCH 0/8] signals: Support more than 64 signals Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH 1/8] signals: Make the real-time signal system calls accept different sized sigset_t from user space Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH 3/8] signals: Use a helper function to test if a signal is a real-time signal Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH 4/8] signals: Remove sigmask() macro Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH 5/8] signals: Better support cases where _NSIG_WORDS is greater than 2 Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH 6/8] signals: Round up _NSIG_WORDS Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH 7/8] signals: Add signal debugging Walt Drummond
2022-01-03 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH 8/8] signals: Support BSD VSTATUS, KERNINFO and SIGINFO Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 7:27 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-01-07 21:48 ` Arseny Maslennikov
2022-01-07 21:52 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-07 22:39 ` Arseny Maslennikov
2022-01-08 14:38 ` Arseny Maslennikov
2022-01-03 18:48 ` Al Viro [this message]
2022-01-03 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 0/8] signals: Support more than 64 signals Al Viro
2022-01-03 18:48 ` Al Viro
2022-01-04 1:00 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 1:00 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 1:00 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 1:16 ` Al Viro
2022-01-04 1:16 ` Al Viro
2022-01-04 1:16 ` Al Viro
2022-01-04 1:49 ` Al Viro
2022-01-04 1:49 ` Al Viro
2022-01-04 1:49 ` Al Viro
2022-01-04 18:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-01-04 18:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-01-04 18:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-01-04 20:52 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-01-04 20:52 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-01-04 20:52 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-01-04 21:33 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 21:33 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 21:33 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 22:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-01-04 22:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-01-04 22:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-01-04 22:23 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-01-04 22:23 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-01-04 22:23 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-01-04 22:31 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 22:31 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-04 22:31 ` Walt Drummond
2022-01-07 19:29 ` Arseny Maslennikov
2022-01-07 19:29 ` Arseny Maslennikov
2022-01-07 19:29 ` Arseny Maslennikov
2022-05-19 12:27 ` Pavel Machek
2022-05-19 12:27 ` Pavel Machek
2022-05-19 12:27 ` Pavel Machek
2022-01-07 19:19 ` Arseny Maslennikov
2022-01-07 19:19 ` Arseny Maslennikov
2022-01-07 19:19 ` Arseny Maslennikov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YdNE6UXRT02135Pd@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=aacraid@microsemi.com \
--cc=anna.schumaker@netapp.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=dinguyen@kernel.org \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=mattst88@gmail.com \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=walt@drummond.us \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yzaikin@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.