Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270453AbTHSOAl (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2003 10:00:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270869AbTHSNjy (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2003 09:39:54 -0400 Received: from 34.mufa.noln.chcgil24.dsl.att.net ([12.100.181.34]:34293 "EHLO tabby.cats.internal") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270447AbTHSNcQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2003 09:32:16 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="CP 1252" From: Jesse Pollard To: "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Dumb question: Why are exceptions such as SIGSEGV not logged Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 08:27:05 -0500 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] References: <3F3EB8FA.1080605@sktc.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <03081908270500.01226@tabby> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 870 Lines: 21 On Monday 18 August 2003 21:43, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Followup to: > By author: "David Schwartz" > In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > > There is no mechanism that is guaranteed to terminate a process other > > than sending yourself an exception that is not caught. So in cases where > > you must guarantee that your process terminates, it is perfectly > > reasonable to send yourself a SIGILL. > > exit(2)? > > -hpa Nope... A monitoring process must send the exit to a different thread... which may be being directed to generate a core dump. - 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/