All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
	linux-man@vger.kernel.org, libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: signals: Bug or manpage inconsistency?
Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 22:54:38 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705302241040.2356@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFygrsUhzQzEOX7YLzxMWE_GbKhJjQZ7nSDXnFFbRAWCJA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 30 May 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Obviously this is a user-visible change and it can break something. Say, an
> > application does sigwaitinfo(SIGCHLD) and SIGCHLD is ignored (SIG_IGN), this
> > will no longer work.
> 
> That's an interesting special case. Yes, SIG_IGN actually has magical
> properties wrt SIGCHLD. It basically means the opposite of ignoring
> it, it's an "implicit signal handler".  So I could imagine people
> using SIG_IGN to avoid the signal handler, but then block SIG_CHLD and
> using sigwait() for it.
> 
> That sounds nonportable as hell, but I could imagine people doing it
> because it happens to work.

Just that it does not work. See do_notify_parent()

	if (!tsk->ptrace && sig == SIGCHLD &&
	    (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_handler == SIG_IGN ||
	     (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_flags & SA_NOCLDWAIT))) {
		/*
		 * We are exiting and our parent doesn't care.  POSIX.1
		 * defines special semantics for setting SIGCHLD to SIG_IGN
		 * or setting the SA_NOCLDWAIT flag: we should be reaped
		 * automatically and not left for our parent's wait4 call.
		 * Rather than having the parent do it as a magic kind of
		 * signal handler, we just set this to tell do_exit that we
		 * can be cleaned up without becoming a zombie.  Note that
		 * we still call __wake_up_parent in this case, because a
		 * blocked sys_wait4 might now return -ECHILD.
		 *
		 * Whether we send SIGCHLD or not for SA_NOCLDWAIT
		 * is implementation-defined: we do (if you don't want
		 * it, just use SIG_IGN instead).
		 */
		autoreap = true;
		if (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_handler == SIG_IGN)
			sig = 0;
	}
        if (valid_signal(sig) && sig)
                __group_send_sig_info(sig, &info, tsk->parent);

So if the oarent has SIG_IGN we do not send a signal at all. So it's not a
really interesting special case and the magic properties are not that magic
either. Test case below. The parent waits forever.

Thanks,

	tglx
---

#include <unistd.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>

int main(void)
{
	struct sigaction action;
	sigset_t set;
	int signum;

	sigemptyset(&set);
	sigaddset (&set, SIGCHLD);

	memset(&action, 0, sizeof(action));
	action.sa_handler = SIG_IGN;
	sigaction(SIGCHLD, &action, NULL);

	sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, &set, NULL);

	if (fork() == 0) {
		sleep(1);
		printf("Child exiting\n");
		exit(0);
	}

	sigwait(&set, &signum);
	printf("Parent exiting\n");
	return 0;
}

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Linus Torvalds
	<torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Michael Kerrisk
	<mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	libc-alpha <libc-alpha-9JcytcrH/bA+uJoB2kUjGw@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: signals: Bug or manpage inconsistency?
Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 22:54:38 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705302241040.2356@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFygrsUhzQzEOX7YLzxMWE_GbKhJjQZ7nSDXnFFbRAWCJA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>

On Tue, 30 May 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > Obviously this is a user-visible change and it can break something. Say, an
> > application does sigwaitinfo(SIGCHLD) and SIGCHLD is ignored (SIG_IGN), this
> > will no longer work.
> 
> That's an interesting special case. Yes, SIG_IGN actually has magical
> properties wrt SIGCHLD. It basically means the opposite of ignoring
> it, it's an "implicit signal handler".  So I could imagine people
> using SIG_IGN to avoid the signal handler, but then block SIG_CHLD and
> using sigwait() for it.
> 
> That sounds nonportable as hell, but I could imagine people doing it
> because it happens to work.

Just that it does not work. See do_notify_parent()

	if (!tsk->ptrace && sig == SIGCHLD &&
	    (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_handler == SIG_IGN ||
	     (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_flags & SA_NOCLDWAIT))) {
		/*
		 * We are exiting and our parent doesn't care.  POSIX.1
		 * defines special semantics for setting SIGCHLD to SIG_IGN
		 * or setting the SA_NOCLDWAIT flag: we should be reaped
		 * automatically and not left for our parent's wait4 call.
		 * Rather than having the parent do it as a magic kind of
		 * signal handler, we just set this to tell do_exit that we
		 * can be cleaned up without becoming a zombie.  Note that
		 * we still call __wake_up_parent in this case, because a
		 * blocked sys_wait4 might now return -ECHILD.
		 *
		 * Whether we send SIGCHLD or not for SA_NOCLDWAIT
		 * is implementation-defined: we do (if you don't want
		 * it, just use SIG_IGN instead).
		 */
		autoreap = true;
		if (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_handler == SIG_IGN)
			sig = 0;
	}
        if (valid_signal(sig) && sig)
                __group_send_sig_info(sig, &info, tsk->parent);

So if the oarent has SIG_IGN we do not send a signal at all. So it's not a
really interesting special case and the magic properties are not that magic
either. Test case below. The parent waits forever.

Thanks,

	tglx
---

#include <unistd.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>

int main(void)
{
	struct sigaction action;
	sigset_t set;
	int signum;

	sigemptyset(&set);
	sigaddset (&set, SIGCHLD);

	memset(&action, 0, sizeof(action));
	action.sa_handler = SIG_IGN;
	sigaction(SIGCHLD, &action, NULL);

	sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, &set, NULL);

	if (fork() == 0) {
		sleep(1);
		printf("Child exiting\n");
		exit(0);
	}

	sigwait(&set, &signum);
	printf("Parent exiting\n");
	return 0;
}



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-05-30 20:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-30 13:21 signals: Bug or manpage inconsistency? Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-30 16:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-30 16:14   ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-30 17:04   ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-05-30 17:19     ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-30 17:19       ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-30 19:18       ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-05-30 19:18         ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-05-30 20:54       ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2017-05-30 20:54         ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-31  0:48         ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-05-31  0:48           ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-05-31  1:10           ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-05-31  1:10             ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-05-30 17:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-30 17:04   ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-30 19:35   ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-30 19:35     ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-30 19:58     ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-30 19:58       ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-30 21:00       ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-30 21:00         ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-31  6:51 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-05-31  6:51   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-06-01  7:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-06-01  7:01   ` Eric W. Biederman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.20.1705302241040.2356@nanos \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.