On Mon, 22 Jan 2007, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 02:59:56PM +0100, Paolo Ornati wrote:
> >
> > the ERESTARTNOHAND thing is handled in arch specific signal code,
>
> In the signal handling path yes.
Right.
> Not always in the case of select, though. Check core_sys_select:
No, even in the case of select().
> if (!ret) {
> ret = -ERESTARTNOHAND;
> if (signal_pending(current))
> goto out;
> ret = 0;
Since we have "signal_pending(current)" being true, we _know_ that the
signal handling path will be triggered, so the ERESTARTNOHAND will be
changed into the appropriate error return (or restart) by the signal
handling code.
> Its possible for core_sys_select to return ERESTARTNOHAND to sys_select, which
> will in turn (as its currently written), return that value back to user space.
No. Exactly because sys_select() will always return through the system
call handling path, and that will turn the ERESTARTNOHAND into something
else.
NOTE! If you use "ptrace()", you may see the internal errors. But that's a
ptrace-only thing, and may have fooled you into thinking that the actual
_application_ sees those internal errors. It won't.
Of course, we could have some signal-handling bug here, but if so, it
would affect a lot more than just select(). Have you actually seen
ERESTARTNOINTR in the app (not just ptrace?)
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
