On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 04:24:49PM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote:
> I haven't read through this whole thread, so this may have been
> suggested, but why not have a new signal "SIGNMEM". Can't be caught but
> can be ignored. Default is to take the signal and terminate the program
> that faulted. If ignored, put process to sleep until the memory request
> can be satisfied. Then something like 'X' or apache could ignore, while
> 'gcc' would just die.
We've run out of non-rt signals. We could bump this up a bit and if
we do decide to it should be done _now_ to minimize and ABI breakage
later on (I've been looking at such a thing myself recently).
The sticky part is -- I'm not sure how well this will work with glibc
as it seems to have similar assumptions in there.
I really hope that if we do even need to extend this, we don't end up
with multiple signal system calls to maintain backwards
compatibility, such a thing is horribly ugly IMO.
-cw
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:25 EST