Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932357AbVISI5m (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2005 04:57:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932386AbVISI5m (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2005 04:57:42 -0400 Received: from mtagate1.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.150]:58352 "EHLO mtagate1.de.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932357AbVISI5l (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2005 04:57:41 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] more sigkill priority fix From: Martin Schwidefsky Reply-To: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com To: Roland McGrath Cc: Heiko Carstens , Atsushi Nemoto , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, macro@linux-mips.org, akpm@osdl.org, dev@sw.ru In-Reply-To: <20050919084607.0D50C180E1D@magilla.sf.frob.com> References: <20050919084607.0D50C180E1D@magilla.sf.frob.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 10:57:44 +0200 Message-Id: <1127120264.4897.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 710 Lines: 23 On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 01:46 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > Is this the way the kernel is supposed to handle signals now? > > Just wondering, since this changes signal handling quite significantly from > > what it was before. > > It has always been the correct behavior. Does that mean that it is incorrect to deliver one signal at a time? -- blue skies, Martin Martin Schwidefsky Linux for zSeries Development & Services IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH - 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/