[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070520222422.GT2012@bingen.suse.de>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 00:24:22 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Folkert van Heusden <folkert@...heusden.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
righiandr@...rs.sourceforge.net,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: signals logged / [RFC] log out-of-virtual-memory events
On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 11:20:36PM +0200, Folkert van Heusden wrote:
> > > + switch(sig) {
> > > + case SIGQUIT:
> > > + case SIGILL:
> > > + case SIGTRAP:
> > > + case SIGABRT:
> > > + case SIGBUS:
> > > + case SIGFPE:
> > > + case SIGSEGV:
> > > + case SIGXCPU:
> > > + case SIGXFSZ:
> > > + case SIGSYS:
> > > + case SIGSTKFLT:
> >
> > Unconditional? That's definitely a very bad idea. If anything only unhandled
> > signals should be printed this way because some programs use them internally.
>
> Use these signals internally? Afaik these are fatal, stopping the
> process. So using them internally would be a little tricky.
All of them are catchable.
>
> > But I think your list is far too long anyways.
>
> So, which ones would you like to have removed then?
SIGFPE at least and the accounting signals are dubious too. SIGQUIT can
be also relatively common.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists