From: Michael Kerrisk Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 09:45:24 +0000 (+0100) Subject: seccomp_unotify.2: srcfix: Add a further FIXME relating to SA_RESTART behavior X-Git-Tag: man-pages-5.12~56 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=b183b6503cd0fcec2ee1b64a2f058ca392844593;p=thirdparty%2Fman-pages.git seccomp_unotify.2: srcfix: Add a further FIXME relating to SA_RESTART behavior Signed-off-by: Michael Kerrisk --- diff --git a/man2/seccomp_unotify.2 b/man2/seccomp_unotify.2 index befe476abe..21896d5e5e 100644 --- a/man2/seccomp_unotify.2 +++ b/man2/seccomp_unotify.2 @@ -768,6 +768,15 @@ flag. .\" I mean, it's not like seccomp doesn't already expose weirdness with .\" syscall restarts. Not even arm64 compat agrees[3] with arm32 in this .\" regard. :( +. +.\" FIXME +.\" Michael Kerrisk: +.\" I wonder about the effect of this oddity for system calls that +.\" are normally nonrestartable because they have timeouts. My +.\" understanding is that the kernel doesn't restart those system +.\" calls because it's impossible for the kernel to restart the call +.\" with the right timeout value. I wonder what happens when those +.\" system calls are restarted in the scenario we're discussing.) .SH BUGS If a .BR SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_RECV