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/
