o5r/plan9port
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

play nicer with others w.r.t. signal masks

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
rsc 2005-02-08 19:08:47 +00:00
parent 76164c00c3
commit f3ecd8ae84
1 changed files with 37 additions and 43 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

80
src/lib9/notify.c
View file

@ -31,48 +31,44 @@ typedef struct Sig Sig;
struct Sig struct Sig
{ {
int sig; /* signal number */ int sig; /* signal number */
int restart; /* do we restart the system call after this signal is handled? */ int flags;
int enabled; /* is this signal enabled (not masked)? */
int notified; /* do we call the notify function for this signal? */
}; };
/* enum
* Bug. It is profoundly anti-social to play with the masks like this. {
* For example, even though we don't want to see SIGTSTP, others do. Restart = 1<<0,
* Running bash inside a 9term that has disabled SIGTSTP makes ^Z not work. Ignore = 1<<1,
* Instead we need to leave the signals enabled but notifyoff them. };
*/
/* initial settings; for current status, ask the kernel */
static Sig sigs[] = { static Sig sigs[] = {
SIGHUP, 0, 1, 1, SIGHUP, 0,
SIGINT, 0, 1, 1, SIGINT, 0,
SIGQUIT, 0, 1, 1, SIGQUIT, 0,
SIGILL, 0, 1, 1, SIGILL, 0,
SIGTRAP, 0, 1, 1, SIGTRAP, 0,
/* SIGABRT, 0, 1, 1, */ /* SIGABRT, 0, */
#ifdef SIGEMT #ifdef SIGEMT
SIGEMT, 0, 1, 1, SIGEMT, 0,
#endif #endif
SIGFPE, 0, 1, 1, SIGFPE, 0,
SIGBUS, 0, 1, 1, SIGBUS, 0,
/* SIGSEGV, 0, 1, 1, */ /* SIGSEGV, 0, */
SIGCHLD, 1, 0, 1, SIGCHLD, Restart|Ignore,
SIGSYS, 0, 1, 1, SIGSYS, 0,
SIGPIPE, 0, 0, 1, SIGPIPE, Ignore,
SIGALRM, 0, 1, 1, SIGALRM, 0,
SIGTERM, 0, 1, 1, SIGTERM, 0,
SIGTSTP, 1, 0, 1, SIGTSTP, Restart|Ignore,
SIGTTIN, 1, 0, 1, SIGTTIN, Restart|Ignore,
SIGTTOU, 1, 0, 1, SIGTTOU, Restart|Ignore,
SIGXCPU, 0, 1, 1, SIGXCPU, 0,
SIGXFSZ, 0, 1, 1, SIGXFSZ, 0,
SIGVTALRM, 0, 1, 1, SIGVTALRM, 0,
SIGUSR1, 0, 1, 1, SIGUSR1, 0,
SIGUSR2, 0, 1, 1, SIGUSR2, 0,
SIGWINCH, 1, 0, 1, SIGWINCH, Restart|Ignore,
#ifdef SIGINFO #ifdef SIGINFO
SIGINFO, 1, 1, 1, SIGINFO, Restart|Ignore,
#endif #endif
}; };
@ -121,6 +117,7 @@ signotify(int sig)
{ {
char tmp[64]; char tmp[64];
Jmp *j; Jmp *j;
Sig *s;
j = (*_notejmpbuf)(); j = (*_notejmpbuf)();
switch(p9setjmp(j->b)){ switch(p9setjmp(j->b)){
@ -130,6 +127,9 @@ signotify(int sig)
/* fall through */ /* fall through */
case 1: /* noted(NDFLT) */ case 1: /* noted(NDFLT) */
if(0)print("DEFAULT %d\n", sig); if(0)print("DEFAULT %d\n", sig);
s = findsig(sig);
if(s && (s->flags&Ignore))
return;
signal(sig, SIG_DFL); signal(sig, SIG_DFL);
raise(sig); raise(sig);
_exit(1); _exit(1);
@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ notifyseton(int s, int on)
return -1; return -1;
memset(&sa, 0, sizeof sa); memset(&sa, 0, sizeof sa);
sa.sa_handler = on ? signotify : signonotify; sa.sa_handler = on ? signotify : signonotify;
if(sig->restart) if(sig->flags&Restart)
sa.sa_flags |= SA_RESTART; sa.sa_flags |= SA_RESTART;
/* /*
@ -264,13 +264,7 @@ noteinit(void)
*/ */
if(handler(sig->sig) != SIG_DFL) if(handler(sig->sig) != SIG_DFL)
continue; continue;
/* notifyseton(sig->sig, 1);
* Should we only disable and not enable signals?
* (I.e. if parent has disabled for us, should we still enable?)
* Right now we always initialize to the state we want.
*/
notesetenable(sig->sig, sig->enabled);
notifyseton(sig->sig, sig->notified);
} }
} }