Re: signals logged / [RFC] log out-of-virtual-memory events

From: Andi Kleen
Date: Sun May 20 2007 - 17:27:39 EST


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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/