Subject: Re: Return addresses from trap signals
To: Ben Harris <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jason R Thorpe <email@example.com>
Date: 03/05/2001 17:15:12
On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 01:06:09AM +0000, Ben Harris wrote:
> Actually the code I'm currently concerned about is what _calls_
> trapsignal(), so it's always involved. If the signal's being ignored then
> trapsignal() won't do much and the trap handler will return to the PC it
> just left in the trapframe.
If the signal's being ignored in that case, the process will exit
> That's OK for SIGSEGV. I think SIGSYS will turn out OK anyway (it's not
> triggered by trapsignal(), but by psignal(), so the syscall handler will
> update PC if necessary before the sigcontext is generated). I'm not sure
> what the results of ignoring SIGILL should be, but I suspect most people
> would think doing so was silly.
> Hmm. How about SIGFPE?
I don't think any other ports filter them out specially... to me, if
a program does Bad Things like that, well.. so it loops.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>