Hi Takashi, On Nov 26 17:55, Takashi Yano wrote: > The queue is once cleaned up, however, sigpacket::process() may set > si_signo in the queue to 0 by calling sig_clear(). This patch adds > another loop for cleanup after calling sigpacket::process(). > > Addresses: https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2024-November/256744.html > Fixes: 9d2155089e87 ("(wait_sig): Define variable q to be the start of the > signal queue. Just iterate through sigq queue, deleting processed or zeroed > signals") > Reported-by: Christian Franke <christian.fra...@t-online.de> > Reviewed-by: > Signed-off-by: Takashi Yano <takashi.y...@nifty.ne.jp> > --- > winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc | 11 +++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc b/winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc > index 8f46a80ab..b8d961a07 100644 > --- a/winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc > +++ b/winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc > @@ -1463,6 +1463,17 @@ wait_sig (VOID *) > qnext->si.si_signo = 0; > } > } > + /* Cleanup sigq chain. Remove entries having si_signo == 0. > + There were once cleaned obeve, however sigpacket::process() > + may set si_signo to 0 using sig_clear(). */ > + q = &sigq.start; > + while ((qnext = q->next)) > + { > + if (qnext->si.si_signo) > + q = qnext; > + else > + q->next = qnext->next; > + }
I'm not quite sure, but wouldn't it make more sense to change sig_clear() so that it actually removes the entries from the queue immediately? Using Interlocked functions on the queue may even avoid locking... Thanks, Corinna
