Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7][v4] Define siginfo_from_ancestor_ns()

[Sukadev Bhattiprolu]

Oleg Nesterov [oleg@xxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
| On 12/24, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
| >
| > Oleg Nesterov [oleg@xxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
| > | And, SI_ASYNCIO only matters when we send the signal to the subnamespace,
| > | and in that case we will probably mangle .si_pid. So why don't we warn
| > | when .si_code == SI_USER?
| >
| > I was wondering if I should there too :-) But what do you think ?
| 
| Well, if you ask me, I'd suggest to document the problems with
| sigqueueinfo() and forget. Whatever we do, we can't be always
| right.

Ok.  According to
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online/pages/man2/rt_sigqueueinfo.2.html.
rt_sigqueueinfo() is not directly published to users and users can't be
passing in siginfo_t directly. So no man page update is needed either ? 

Sukadev
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/