signal implementation or documentation bug?

Roman Zippel (zippel@fh-brandenburg.de)
Sun, 18 Jul 1999 19:48:49 +0200 (MET DST)

Hi,

I think I found a bug in the linux signal handling. In the manual page of
sigaction I can find the following:

sa_mask gives a mask of signals which should be blocked
during execution of the signal handler. In addition, the
signal which triggered the handler will be blocked, unless
the SA_NODEFER or SA_NOMASK flags are used.

This lets me think that SA_NODEFER has only an effect on the sent signal,
but in arch/i386/kernel/signal.c:handle_signal() I find the following:

if (!(ka->sa.sa_flags & SA_NODEFER)) {
spin_lock_irq(&current->sigmask_lock);
sigorsets(&current->blocked,&current->blocked,&ka->sa.sa_mask);
sigaddset(&current->blocked,sig);
recalc_sigpending(current);
spin_unlock_irq(&current->sigmask_lock);
}

This means to me, that sa_mask is completly ignored, if SA_NODEFER is set.
Now my problem is how this should really work? BTW In 2.0 you can find
something similiar.

bye, Roman

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/