From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750879AbVHMOAj (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Aug 2005 10:00:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750878AbVHMOAj (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Aug 2005 10:00:39 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-02.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.56]:23971 "EHLO ms-smtp-02.nyroc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750838AbVHMOAj (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Aug 2005 10:00:39 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Convert sigaction to act like other unices From: Steven Rostedt To: Andi Kleen Cc: LKML , rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, gerg@uclinux.org, jdike@karaya.com, sammy@sammy.net, lethal@linux-sh.org, wli@holomorphy.com, davem@davemloft.net, matthew@wil.cx, geert@linux-m68k.org, paulus@samba.org, davej@codemonkey.org.uk, tony.luck@intel.com, dev-etrax@axis.com, rpurdie@rpsys.net, spyro@f2s.com, Robert Wilkens , Bodo Stroesser , Jan Engelhardt , Chris Wright , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: <20050813123956.GN22901@wotan.suse.de> References: <1123900802.5296.88.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050813123956.GN22901@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Kihon Technologies Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 10:00:14 -0400 Message-Id: <1123941614.5296.112.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 14:39 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 10:40:02PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wroqte: > > Here's a patch that converts all architectures to behave like other unix > > boxes signal handling. It's funny that I didn't need to change the m68k > > architecture, since it was the only one that already behaves this way! > > (the m68knommu does not!) > > > > This is not a description of what you changed. A patch entry has to > start with a rationale and then a description of the change. Sorry, I forgot that not all were in on the thread. (duh, I added a bunch of others, I guess I wasn't thinking clearly). http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/9/190 "Singal handling possibly wrong". Here's a summary: Bodo Stroesser noticed a conflict between the man pages and what the kernel was doing in regard to SA_NODEFER. The man pages stated that SA_NODEFER would only not defer the signal that is being processed, where as the the kernel would not defer all signals (including those in sa_mask). The POSIX description of this was very confusing, where Linus thought it explained what the kernel currently does, and I (and others) thought it did what the man pages described. Someone found an updated version that supports my theory. In fact it seems that even the signal would be defered if SA_NODEFER was set but the signal was in the sa_mask. Finally, it was ask, what do other unix boxes do? I wrote a simple program that tested the behavior of this and posted it. I had a couple of responses that tested the following unices: AIX, DU4, IRIX6, Solaris and OSF1, and all of these do it the way the man pages described. Since Linux happens to be the odd ball out, I submitted the patch to make Linux act like other unix boxes with regard to signals and SA_NODEFER. Hope this explains things better. -- Steve