This is the mail archive of the
glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
[Bug libc/4737] fork is not async-signal-safe
- From: "rsa at us dot ibm dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: glibc-bugs at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 19 Nov 2008 16:22:08 -0000
- Subject: [Bug libc/4737] fork is not async-signal-safe
- References: <20070704013541.4737.nmiell@comcast.net>
- Reply-to: sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org
------- Additional Comments From rsa at us dot ibm dot com 2008-11-19 16:22 -------
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > Tom's suggestion: "Another possible solution for this problem would be to just
> > not call atfork registered handlers at all if fork is called from within the
> > context of a signal handler."
> >
> > ... seems to be what the IEEE interpretation recommends and I've thought as well
> > that it might be a potential solution.
> >
> > Ulrich will have to decide whether this is an approach he'd accept.
>
> Thanks for the links Ryan!
>
> Does anyone have any suggests for how a thread can determine that it is running
> in a signal handler? Does glibc maintain a thread specific indicator that a
> thread is running a signal handler? I've been looking at the glibc code (struct
> pthread in particular) and I don't see an obvious indicator there.
Tom, perhaps you can post this question to the libc-help mailing list and
reference this bugzilla?
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4737
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.