Re: How should nano_sleep be fixed (was: ptrace(), fork(), sleep(), exit(), SIGCHLD)

From: Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)
Date: Thu Aug 16 2001 - 05:29:05 EST


On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 12:17:46PM +0200, christophe barbé wrote:
> > asmlinkage long sys_nanosleep(struct timespec *rqtp, struct timespec
> > *rmtp)
> > {
> > struct timespec t;
> > unsigned long expire;
> > + struct pt_regs * regs = (struct pt_regs *) &rqtp;

Note also that this is bogus as an architecture invariant.

On ARM, we have to pass a pt_regs pointer into any function that requires
it.

--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html

- 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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 23 2001 - 21:00:15 EST