Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> And yes, we can end up processing the interrupt before the SVC is
> executed, which is still a hole. So we need to avoid doing the
> restart in userspace - which might actually make things easier.
> I'll take a look into that over the weekend.
Hi Russell, I was
Hi Russell,
Russell King - ARM Linux wrote on 09/02/2011
07:48:12 PM:
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 07:40:34PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > Russell King - ARM Linux wrote on 09/02/2011
> > 07:22:59 PM:
> > > On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 04:47:35PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > > > Assume the scen
Russell King - ARM Linux wrote on 09/02/2011
07:22:59 PM:
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 04:47:35PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > Assume the scenario you initally describe, where a first signal is
> > ignored and leads to system call restart. With your latest patch,
> > you call into syscall_restar
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 04:47:35PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Assume the scenario you initally describe, where a first signal is
> ignored and leads to system call restart. With your latest patch,
> you call into syscall_restart which sets everything up to restart
> the call (with interrupts d
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 07:40:34PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Russell King - ARM Linux wrote on 09/02/2011
> 07:22:59 PM:
> > On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 04:47:35PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > > Assume the scenario you initally describe, where a first signal is
> > > ignored and leads to syst
Russell King - ARM Linux wrote on 09/01/2011
04:00:00 PM:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 03:41:22PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > One way to fix this might be to make the TIF_SYS_RESTART flag
> > itself visible to ptrace, so the GDB could save/restore it
> > along with the rest of the register set;
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 03:41:22PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> The problem now occurs if at point [0.] the target process just
> happened to be blocked in a restartable system call. For this
> sequence to then work as expected, two things have to happen:
>
> - at point [3.], the kernel must *n
Arnd Bergmann wrote on 08/26/2011 04:44:26 PM:
> On Thursday 25 August 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >
> > Arnd, can you test this to make sure your gdb test case still works,
and
> > Mark, can you test this to make sure it fixes your problem please?
>
> Hi Russell,
>
> The patch in ques
