On Sat, 14 Jul 2007, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Davide,
>
> I'm working on the signalfd(2) man page, and I've come
> acorss some puzzling behaviour...
>
> What are the intended semantics of a signalfd file descriptor
> after an execve()?
>
> As far as I can work out, after an execve() the file descriptor
> is still available, but reads from it always return 0, even if:
>
> a) there were signals pending before the execve().
> However, sigpending() shows the signal as pending,
> and the signal can be accepted using sigwaitinfo().
>
> b) we generate a signal after the execve().
>
> Is this intended behavior (the "orphaned sighand" condition
> mentioned in the draft man page you sent me?)? Is it a bug?
It is the intended behaviour. Just like reading from a socket where the
remote peer disconnected. A return 0 from a read from a signalfd should be
interpreted as the "virtual connection" with the signal source has been
dropped.
- Davide
-
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]
