Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 May 2002 19:03:19 +0200 (MET DST) | From | "Maciej W. Rozycki" <> | Subject | Re: mmap, SIGBUS, and handling it |
| |
On Fri, 10 May 2002, David S. Miller wrote:
> I would expect it to return from the handler with no action, possibly > re-executing the faulting instruction (if the reason was synchronous) and > causing an infinite loop. For consistency, whether it makes sense, or not > (ditto for SIGSEGV, etc.). > > 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.
> Next, if we skip the instruation, what should be in the destination > register of the load? There is no reasonable answer. If you put > zero there the program will likely segfault on a NULL pointer > dereference.
This option is out of question, obviously.
> 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.
-- + Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland + +--------------------------------------------------------------+ + e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available +
- 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/
| |