Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Jun 2004 14:49:18 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [patch] signal handler defaulting fix ... |
| |
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> wrote: > > > > > > Following up from the other thread (2.6.x signal handler bug) this bring > > 2.4 behaviour in 2.6. > > > > Pity the poor person who tries to understand this change in a year's time. > Could we have a real changelog please?
Also, do we really care? The 2.6.x behaviour is nicer in that it tends to kill programs more abruptly, while 2.4.x will just let a blocked signal through - possibly letting the program continue, but causing "impossible" bugs in user space.
I don't think we've had any complaints about the 2.6.x behaviour apart from the initial discussion a few months ago. I'd much rather have a debuggable "kill a program that tries to block a synchronous interrupt", than a potentially totally un-debuggable "let the signal through".
Linus - 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/
| |