> > > Then please rename it.
> >
> > Of course it is renamed to SIGSTOP_SUSPEND inside suspend
> > patches. Alas, suspend patches did not reach linus' kernel, yet ;-).
>
> Seems a little long to me, and has _ which no other signal has. Why
> not just SIGSUSPEND? Also, what are the intended semantics of this
Should never be seen by userland.
> new signal, and why doesn't SIGTSTP or SIGSTOP suffice?
Because this needs to be handled internally by kernel and need to be
unmaskable. User processes should not know they were hit by this
signal.
Pavel
-- The best software in life is free (not shareware)! Pavel GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/