[lkml]   [2002]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: mmap, SIGBUS, and handling it
       From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
    Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 19:03:19 +0200 (MET DST)

    On Fri, 10 May 2002, David S. Miller wrote:

    > If we reexecute the instruction it will take the signal endlessly,
    > forever. That makes no sense.

    It depends on an application. It certainly shouldn't be the default, but
    a user may choose such an option for some reason. E.g. for debugging a
    system with an ICE or a similar tool.

    He's talking about how SIG_IGN should behave.

    If you want non-default behavior, specify a signal handler instead
    of SIG_IGN.

    > So my original point I was trying to make, which still stands, is that
    > what is being requested is totally rediculious behavior, trying to
    > ignore a page fault that can't be serviced.

    Why should we enforce policy on a user? If one wants to ignore such
    signals for whatever reason, let him do that.

    We don't specify any policy other than the behavior of SIG_IGN which
    is to kill off the process for SIGBUS.

    If you specify a handler you can have SIGBUS do whatever you want it
    to. There are no enforced limitations, only a specified behavior
    for SIG_IGN when used for SIGBUS.

    The original poster has solved his problem, yet you continue to argue
    one and on and on.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:26    [W:0.023 / U:68.860 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site