On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Yes, the target thread is the one that caused the SIGSEGV, it sends the signal
> to itself. entry.S:ret_from_exception should notice this signal and _dequeue_
> it, no? This signal could be stealed by signal(SIG_IGN) which runs after it
> was delivered.
Right. But it will dequeue it by *taking* it.
IOW, this has absolutely nothing to do with signalfd.
That's all I mean.
> My point was that it is _possible_ to steal a thread-local SIGSEGV even
> without
> signalfd, nothing bad should happen.
That makes no sense.
You don't "steal" it. You take it. It's what SIGSEGV (and _any_ signal)
has always been about. You get the signal, enter the signal handler, and
handle it.
No "stealing". No signalfd, no *nothing*. Just normal signal behaviour.
Linus
-
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/
