From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965583AbXCGQ5h (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 11:57:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965587AbXCGQ5h (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 11:57:37 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:43446 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965583AbXCGQ5g (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 11:57:36 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 08:57:28 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Stephen Rothwell cc: Davide Libenzi , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] signalfd v1 - signalfd core ... In-Reply-To: <20070307233833.f1482f86.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Message-ID: References: <20070307155553.06c82ca1.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20070307233833.f1482f86.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > You probably need the queue anyway because the real time signals are > supposed to queue. Davide - the *real* problem is (I think) that you try to allow signals to be returned *both* by signalfd() and as a real signal. That's wrong, wrong, wrong. My original patch used "dequeue_signal()" to dequeue signals. Trust me, I did that for a reason. Your re-design to think that you can get the signal without using the real signal dequeueing is simply broken. The signalfd must be an "either or" thing. Either you get it as a real signal, or you get it off the signalfd(). Not both. Not neither. Linus