On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 03:53:25PM +0100, PaX Team wrote: > sorry if you got this twice, had smtpd problems... > > On 26 Mar 2013 at 15:20, Luis Henriques wrote: > > > 3.5.7.9 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me > > know. > > > > ------------------ > > > > From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]> > > > > commit 522cff142d7d2f9230839c9e1f21a4d8bcc22a4a upstream. > > > > __ARCH_HAS_SA_RESTORER is the preferred conditional for use in 3.9 and > > later kernels, per Kees. > > does __ARCH_HAS_SA_RESTORER exist in the 3.5 stable series at all? i thought > it > was new to 3.9...
You're right, __ARCH_HAS_SA_RESTORER has been added on 3.9 only. However, due to build failures for some archs (mips, ia64, ...) using the upstream 2ca39528c01a933f6689cd6505ce65bd6d68a530 commit, Ben Hutchings has cooked a patch that adds this definition to stable series. This patch is currently under review for the 3.5 kernel: [PATCH 149/150] signal: Define __ARCH_HAS_SA_RESTORER so we know whether to clear sa_restorer Cheers, -- Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
