>You don't understand the initial problem. This is that
I am not even considering it now. I was considering what the kernel should
do after a:
kill(SIGSTOP);
kill(SIGCONT);
Richard was talking about what happens after a _signal_ and not after a
ptrace_continue. These are two different things and we can make them
behave in completly different way inside the kernel. I don't think you
should compare the SIGSTOP+SIGCONG with SIGSTOP+PTRACE_CONTINUE.
>reasons outside the program. I user hitting ^Z or gdb stopping and
I think we should make difference between ^Z and gdb. The signal code is
filled by ugly special cases exactly because they are different things
AFIK.
Do you agree that ^Z is just correct returning -EINTR immediatly at
SIGCONT time (aka `fg` time)?
Should we make PTRACE_CONTINUE to force nanosleep to continue (unlike the
SIGCONT case?)? BTW, I am not sure if nanosleep is the only place that you
may like to change in this respect...
Andrea
-
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/