Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 3 May 2019 06:34:35 +0000
From:   Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
To:     Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        omar.kilani@gmail.com, jbaron@akamai.com, arnd@arndb.de,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal: Adjust error codes according to
 restore_user_sigmask()
Message-ID: <20190503063435.446aqcckbc6ri7xx@dcvr>
References: <20190503033440.cow6xm4p4hezgkxv@linux-r8p5>
 <20190503034205.12121-1-deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190503034205.12121-1-deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I was trying a new setup at work. I should have tested it.
> My bad, I've checked this one.

Thanks.  This is good w.r.t. epoll_pwait and ppoll when applied
to 5.0.11 (no fs/io_uring.c).

Can't think of anything which uses pselect or aio on my system;
but it looks right to me.

> I've removed the questionable reported-by, since we're not sure if
> it is actually the same issue.

Yes, I hope Omar can test this, too.

Thanks again, all!