Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:41:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:41:02 -0400 Received: from node-209-133-23-217.caravan.ru ([217.23.133.209]:22533 "EHLO mail.tv-sign.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:40:59 -0400 Message-ID: <3D96F771.E6D7B2B0@tv-sign.ru> Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:52:01 +0400 From: Oleg Nesterov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CC: Ingo Molnar Subject: [UPATCH] force_sig_info() Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1046 Lines: 35 Hello. This is my third attempt: On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > 2.5.34 introduced this change in force_sig_info() > > - return send_sig_info(sig, info, t); > + return send_sig_info(sig, (void *)1, t); > > I beleive, it is wrong, info can carry useful information > from do_page_fault, traps. And this (info *)1 does not > prevent send_signal() from allocation of siginfo struct. > Ingo, could you please clarify? Call me stupid, but i still believe it is bug. --- linux-2.5.39/kernel/signal.c~ Sun Sep 29 16:37:08 2002 +++ linux-2.5.39/kernel/signal.c Sun Sep 29 16:37:35 2002 @@ -781,7 +781,7 @@ recalc_sigpending_tsk(t); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&t->sigmask_lock, flags); - return send_sig_info(sig, (void *)1, t); + return send_sig_info(sig, info, t); } static int Oleg. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/