From ebf7d6eedb1969b03187398fe730cc03bdd9aae3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2015 12:22:23 -0800
Subject: Fix nptl/tst-kill5 not to presume SIGRTMAX exists.

---
 ChangeLog        | 2 ++
 nptl/tst-kill5.c | 3 ++-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
index c28f7e542e..4ca6759f42 100644
--- a/ChangeLog
+++ b/ChangeLog
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 2015-02-06  Roland McGrath  <roland@hack.frob.com>
 
+	* nptl/tst-kill5.c (do_test): Use INT_MAX rather than SIGRTMAX + 10.
+
 	* nptl/tst-join5.c: Drop #include <sys/syscall.h>.
 	(wait_code): New function replaces macro.
 	Call nanosleep rather than syscall.
diff --git a/nptl/tst-kill5.c b/nptl/tst-kill5.c
index f16aae9512..0717c039d9 100644
--- a/nptl/tst-kill5.c
+++ b/nptl/tst-kill5.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
 #include <signal.h>
 #include <stdio.h>
 #include <stdlib.h>
+#include <limits.h>
 
 
 int
@@ -28,7 +29,7 @@ do_test (void)
 {
   /* XXX This test might require architecture and system specific changes.
      There is no guarantee that this signal number is invalid.  */
-  int e = pthread_kill (pthread_self (), SIGRTMAX + 10);
+  int e = pthread_kill (pthread_self (), INT_MAX);
   if (e == 0)
     {
       puts ("kill didn't failed");
-- 
cgit 1.4.1