Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] signal: Teach sigsuspend to use set_user_sigmask

[Eric W. Biederman]

Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 06/10, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> Personally I don't think anyone sane would intentionally depend on this
>> and I don't think there is a sufficiently reliable way to depend on this
>> by accident that people would actually be depending on it.
>
> Agreed.
>
> As I said I like these changes and I see nothing wrong. To me they fix the
> current behaviour, or at least make it more consistent.
>
> But perhaps this should be documented in the changelog? To make it clear
> that this change was intentional.

Good point.  I had not documented it because I thought I was only
disabling an optimization.

Eric