lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:22    [W:0.060 / U:1.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site