Messages in this thread | | | From | "David Schwartz" <> | Subject | RE: Dumb question: Why are exceptions such as SIGSEGV not logged | Date | Tue, 19 Aug 2003 12:28:19 -0700 |
| |
> > There is no mechanism that is guaranteed to terminate a > > process other than > > sending yourself an exception that is not caught. So in cases > > where you must > > guarantee that your process terminates, it is perfectly > > reasonable to send > > yourself a SIGILL.
> exit(2)?
And what if a registered 'atexit' function needs to acquire a mutex that is held by a thread that's in an endless loop? What if a standard I/O stream has buffered data for a local disk that failed? I'm looking for a mechanism that is guaranteed to terminate a process immediately.
DS
- 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/
| |