Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Jun 2004 15:13:50 -0700 (PDT) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: [patch] signal handler defaulting fix ... |
| |
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > > It's not that the program try to block the signal. It's the kernel that > > during the delivery disables the signal. Then when the signal handler > > longjmp(), the signal remains disabled. The next time the signal is raised > > again, the kernel does not honor the existing handler, but it reset to > > SIG_DFL. > > So? That program is buggy. Setting the signal handler to SIG_DFL causes it > to be killed with a nice "killed by SIGFPE" message, and now the bug is > visible, and can be fixed. > > Hint: it should have done a siglongjmp().
That's what I posted him. Three examples on how to make the thing work w/out kernel fixes. Then Andries investigated about POSIX compliancy and noticed that basically it is undefined the behaviour a program will get. Let's leave as is then.
- Davide
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |