lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: signal(SIGFPE,SIG_IGN), possible solution?
Date
Followup to:  <Pine.LNX.3.91.960425074845.22041C-100000@linux.cs.Helsinki.FI>
By author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@cs.helsinki.fi>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> What is so horribly hard in understanding the fact that this is not a
> kernel issue at all. Why do people insist that the added code should go
> into the KERNEL, when the problem is in your broken programs?
>

No kidding. However, it seems to me that either SIGILL, SIGIOT or
SIGBUS (in decreasing order of personal preference) would be a better
signal than SIGFPE; I think it is reasonable that a program should be
able to expect that receiving a SIGFPE means an FP exception has
occurred.

By the way, how does one turn on FP exceptions (ideally, specific IEEE
exceptions) under Linux/i386?

-hpa
--
PGP public key available - finger hpa@zytor.com
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Bahá'u'lláh
I don't work for Yggdrasil, but they sponsor the linux.* hierarchy.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.070 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site