lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: PATCH: clear blocked AND pending on exec
Date
> 
> The new process image also inherits the following attributes from
> the calling process image:
>
> [...]
>
> (12) Process signal mask (see 3.3.5)
>
> (13) Pending signals (see 3.3.6)
>
> [...]
>
> So either part of your patch contravenes POSIX, I'm afraid.

I don't have POSIX at hand, but does it not also specify exec() from a
signal handler is OK? I am pretty sure it does. In this case, the new
image has the "current" signal blocked. Is this proper? It seems obtuse that
a process would have to do sigemptyset() and sigprocmask() before exec().

comments? should we perhaps clear the 'current' signal from the mask, or
is that just overinterpreting?

Tim

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.269 / U:4.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site