lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jun]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:1.093 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site