> That'd be a limitation. Like you can choose to not handle SEGV, you can
> choose to have a signalfd listening to it. Of course, not with the
> intention to *handle* the signal, but with a notification intent.
Hrm.. either you handle it or you are dead ... I fail to see how
signalfd can sneak in to catch it just at the right time...
> > I'm actually thinking we shoud -also- only handle shared signals in
> > dequeue_signal() when called from a different task.
>
> Why do you want to impose this? signalfd is a "sniffer", and the user
> controls what it can dequeue/sniff or what not. I don't see a reason of
> imposing such limits, unless there're clear technical issues.
Well, a synchronous signal such a SIGSEGV, SIGILL or SIGFPE generally
means that execution cannot continue unless the signal handler does
something about it...
I think you are opening a whole can of worms here.
> > Well.. you certainly need to instanciate a signalfd for every thread in
> > the process if you want to get shared signals for sure.
>
> Why? Or better, what do you mean for "instanciate"?
Well, because the kernel makes the decision of which thread to target
the signal for a shared signal at emission time (though it -can- be
caught by another thread).
/me reads more code to be sure..
Oh well, a read from signalfd created on one thread -will- catch any
shared signal that was already pending, whatever thread the kernel
decided to target it at, it seems (that is, whatever thread actually got
TIF_SIGPENDING set), but will only catch private signals for _that_
thread (and I still think catching private signals is a wrong thing).
However, I'm not sure about the wakeup condition. signalfd_deliver will
wakeup anybody in the signalfd_list, which is -not- whoever is blocked
in signalfd_read() unless I'm missing something.
For your scheme to work, signalfd_read() you probably need to keep a
separate list of people to be nofified of signals and add current to it
from signalfd_list().
Ben.
-
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/
- References:
- [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
- signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
- Re: signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
- Re: signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
[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]