Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:00:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:00:15 -0500 Received: from t2.redhat.com ([199.183.24.243]:59638 "EHLO dot.cygnus.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:59:58 -0500 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:58:08 -0800 From: Richard Henderson To: "David S. Miller" Cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com, schwab@suse.de, linux-ia64@linuxia64.org, marcelo@conectiva.com.br, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: alpha bug in signal handling Message-ID: <20011205085808.A8634@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20011204171426.B7982@redhat.com> <15373.33622.236872.92057@napali.hpl.hp.com> <20011204190048.B8179@redhat.com> <20011205.032304.102576056.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20011205.032304.102576056.davem@redhat.com>; from davem@redhat.com on Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 03:23:04AM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 03:23:04AM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > I don't understand why this is even necessary. > > What if the interrupt comes in on another processor. How does this > return from trap behavior avoid that interrupt modifying the signal > and/or scheduling state wrt. the current cpu's task? It doesn't. But it also prevents the IPI from being recognized until we are back in userland. Apparently DMT had a test case that failed without disabling interrupts; I didn't see it myself. r~ - 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/