Re: signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)

Jeff Dike writes:

> On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 12:50:04PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > Yeah, synchronous signals should probably never be delivered to another
> > process, even via signalfd. There's no point delivering a SEGV to
> > somebody else :-)
> 
> Sure there is.  UML does exactly that - intercepting child signals
> (including SEGV) with wait.

What Ben was talking about was stealing a synchronous SEGV from a task
without stopping it, and as Ben says that makes no sense.
Intercepting a signal and stopping the task is reasonable, and that is
what ptrace does, and I assume also UML.

Paul.
-
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/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
  - From: Jeff Dike <[email protected]>

References:
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
  - From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
  - From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
  - From: Nicholas Miell <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
  - From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
  - From: Nicholas Miell <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
  - From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
  - From: Nicholas Miell <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes
  - From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>
- signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
  - From: Nicholas Miell <[email protected]>
- Re: signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
  - From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
  - From: Jeff Dike <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 00/10] Containers(V10): Generic Process Containers
Next by Date: Re: [patch 7/8] fdmap v2 - implement sys_socket2
Previous by thread: Re: signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
Next by thread: Re: signalfd API issues (was Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]