Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261599AbUKOOJe (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:09:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261602AbUKOOJe (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:09:34 -0500 Received: from mail-ex.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:1217 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261599AbUKOOJa (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:09:30 -0500 To: "Ulrich Windl" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: CPU hogs ignoring SIGTERM (unkillable processes) References: <4198A766.28114.106DD7B@rkdvmks1.ngate.uni-regensburg.de> From: Andreas Schwab X-Yow: And furthermore, my bowling average is unimpeachable!!! Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:39:22 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4198A766.28114.106DD7B@rkdvmks1.ngate.uni-regensburg.de> (Ulrich Windl's message of "Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:56:05 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 931 Lines: 23 "Ulrich Windl" writes: > Hello, > > today I've discovered a programming error in one of my programs (that's fixed > already). When trying to replace the binary, I found out that the processes seem > unaffected by a plain "kill": They just continue to consume CPU. However, a "kill > -9" terminates them. ist that intended behavior? I guess not. Here are some facts: Are you sure it doesn't block or ignore the signal? Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux AG, Maxfeldstra?e 5, 90409 N?rnberg, Germany Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." - 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/