X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:message-id:from:to:subject:references
	:in-reply-to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=pG6U2kQXUIQ27vA5K
	RApGpjTpEQi+69XHsWM+E5Vh26H1Eayktv4gqr4bL5A9N9hk4dIcUJN+QJQ3rEt/
	NBGfEUSSMF01FRAibbRNIDt1ZLWT77vpqra4fFtQmua+nPNTGUzL65rcam6JnGVk
	MEzNpzUDY9TFMByMKxCHqZJzfc=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:message-id:from:to:subject:references
	:in-reply-to:content-type; s=default; bh=Qsdt/g1IwbnUOPrF92qYVY6
	0uqs=; b=FcRQrZRz8QIYdtSbfriLxHTjG6TxQkVwyaOSLDZDONUD+uSQqcczyQk
	aTf3oxXV4VSuT34q8BASOSJOoZ8SbApsKgQR6ywECtl0hrYsLpZCgPZH0L8KsNDH
	U30y/lqkDKcO0skdBILIcSWgmDshK8D63w6cuk1S2l34so6Omf9k=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Blocking, henri, exhibits, receipt
X-HELO:	lb1-smtp-cloud7.xs4all.net
Date:	Mon, 14 Aug 2017 08:03:07 +0200
Message-ID:	<8f7f7f8ae098c1321f608645c750cae4@smtp-cloud7.xs4all.net>
From:	Houder <houder AT xs4all DOT nl>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Signal delivered while blocked
References:	<20170804074445 DOT GB3154757 AT rfd DOT leadboat DOT com>
In-Reply-to:	<20170804074445.GB3154757@rfd.leadboat.com>
User-Agent:	mua.awk 0.99
X-CMAE-Envelope:	MS4wfMwT6/DsR4cHxdR21AbUhniarKZu8Ags+HbelIDl2dST66j4RR3+4DdAUlNYZDtkMuyw+vwp72P7PyydWVy/tF5Ax/WY9QAf3zffmabNnQxDxTyxX6ao OSJ0/WuLpc+uji72b6avkmxJpneXPE18mI9pKheTPbBp7LMX+UxP0VG2znYo+Au0DprdCeVj623dFg==

On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 00:44:45, Noah Misch wrote:
> --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> The attached demonstration program blocks signals (with sigprocmask()) to
> achieve mutual exclusion between signal handlers.  It aborts upon receipt of a
> blocked signal.  On "CYGWIN_NT-10.0 2.7.0(0.306/5/3) 2017-02-12 13:18 x86_64",
> signals regularly arrive despite being blocked.  Essential parts of the
> program include handling two signal numbers and having handlers run for at
> least 1-2ms; this problem goes away if I remove one of those attributes.
> GNU/Linux, AIX, Solaris, and "CYGWIN_NT-6.0 1.7.27(0.271/5/3) 2013-12-09 11:57
> i686" never deliver a blocked signal to this program.  I think this Cygwin
> behavior is non-conforming.

Hi Noah,

I do not think that Cygwin is the problem here; your code is the problem
here, I believe.

Please, study, for example, chapters 20 and 21 of LPI (Linux Programming
Interface by Michael Kerrisk).

(20.10 The Signal Mask (Blocking Signal Delivery)
(20.13 Changing Signal Dispositions: sigaction())

You cannot use sigprocmask() like you do; you cannot use SIG_SETMASK as
a parameter in sigprocmask() within the context of a handler.

Cygwin exhibits misbehaviour in case of your code, because it is slower
than Linux; however, the code is also wrong for Linux.

The misbehaviour occurs as result of nested interrupts in case of your
code (yes, nested interrupts are possible with Linux/Unix!).
However your code does not experience nesting under Linux, because, as
I said, Linux is faster than Cygwin.

-----
The simplest way to exclude one signal from another, is to specify the
signal (or signals) in the sa_mask of the sigaction parameter ...

    see sigaction()

-----
However if you desire 'control' during the execution of a handler, you
have to resort to sigprocmask(), and use SIG_BLOCK and SIG_UNBLOCK, in
order to add and remove a specific signal to/from the mask.

    see sigprocmask()

You cannot use SIG_SETMASK in that context.

Regards,

Henri

=====


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -