[lkml]   [2004]   [Jun]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] signal handler defaulting fix ...

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Davide Libenzi <> 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".

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean