From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 18:32:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 18:32:14 -0500 Received: from 64-178-80-34.customer.algx.net ([64.178.80.34]:49397 "HELO mail2.there.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 18:32:01 -0500 From: "Eric Ries" To: "Alan Cox" Cc: Subject: RE: FPU precision & signal handlers (bug?) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:31:26 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Alan Cox [mailto:alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk] > Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 2:38 PM > To: Eric Ries > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: FPU precision & signal handlers (bug?) > > > Think about MMX and hopefully it makes sense then. Yes, I think I understand why this is the case presently. > > strikes me as kind of a hack. Why should the signal handler, alone > > among all my functions (excepting main) be responsible for blowing > > away the control word? > > Right - I would expect it to be restored at the end of the signal handler > for you - is that occuring or not ? I just want to make sure I understand > the precise details of the problem here. Yes, my belief is that the kernel undoes the FINIT changes by restoring the FPU state after the signal handler returns. Eric