Subject: Re: Never mind. Re: Signal left blocked after signal handler.
From: Albert Cahalan <albert@users.sf.net>
To: linux-kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: bruce@perens.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: 
Message-Id: <1069883580.723.416.camel@cube>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: 26 Nov 2003 16:53:00 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1093
Lines: 29

> One difference in 2.4.x and 2.6.x is the signal blocking
> wrt blocked signals that are _forced_ (ie anything that
> is thread-synchronous, like a SIGSEGV/SIGTRAP/SIGBUS that
> happens as a result of a fault):
>
>  - in 2.4.x they will just punch through the block
>  - in 2.6.x they will refuse to punch through a blocked
>    signal, but since they can't be delivered they will
>    cause the process to be killed.
...
> and in 2.4.x this will cause infinte SIGSEGV's (well,
> they'll be caught by the stack size eventually, but you
> see the problem: do a "strace" to see what's going on).
> In 2.6.x the second SIGSEGV will just kill the program
> immediately.

How about making the process sleep in a killable state?

This is as if the blocking was obeyed, but doesn't
burn CPU time. Only a debugger should be able to
tell the difference.


-
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/