Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Feb 2003 13:42:58 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: another subtle signals issue |
| |
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Roland McGrath wrote: > > This should be fine (almost). POSIX leaves it unspecified whether a > blocked, ignored signal is left pending or not. The only thing it requires > is that setting a blocked signal to SIG_IGN clears any pending signal, and > sigaction already does that.
Hmm.. We could move the blocking test down, and only consider that for the "SIG_DFL" case.
The function I did matches what the old signal code did, but the more signals we can truly ignore, the better. I dunno.
Linus
- 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/
| |