On Sun, 20 May 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > I think it fits the rule "buffer must be big enough for at least one > > sigingo". > > We use the special return 0; as indicator that the process we were > > monitoring signals, detached the sighand. > > > > hm. Kernel violates proper read() semantics in many places. Looks like we > just did it again.
I think we can have the check that "if size == 0 return 0". The above cited return-0-on-detch would still apply for enough sized buffers. So: 1) size == 0, return 0 (POSIX wants this) 2) size < sizeof(signalfd_siginfo), return EINVAL 3) size >= sizeof(signalfd_siginfo) && DETACH, return 0 The signalfd falls into what POSIX defined as "special file", and can return a lower-than-size result. > Unless we just remove the __clear_user() altogether. Who said that "Unused > memebers should be zero"? Because it is a typically used value for still-unused/reserved members? Better than random values I think ;) Members validity is driven by si_code & SI_MASK anyway. - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
