Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:52:45 +0000 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: Never mind. Re: Signal left blocked after signal handler. |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > I personally think it is "good taste" to actually set the SA_NODEFER flag > if you know you depend on the behaviour, but if there are lots of existing > applications that actually depend on the "forced punch-through" behaviour, > then I'll obviously have to change the 2.6.x behaviour (a stable > user-level ABI is a lot more important than my personal preferences).
I also have a program which depends on the behaviour of nesting SIGSEGVs, however luckily I already set the SA_NODEFER flag :)
-- Jamie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |