This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

what to do about dl_iterate_phdr()

From: David Mosberger <davidm at napali dot hpl dot hp dot com>
To: libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com
Cc: davidm at napali dot hpl dot hp dot com
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 11:39:46 -0700
Subject: what to do about dl_iterate_phdr()
References: <16491.51649.225477.81600@napali.hpl.hp.com><200404012122.i31LM3sg027149@magilla.sf.frob.com><16492.44824.546092.273252@napali.hpl.hp.com>
Reply-to: davidm at hpl dot hp dot com

dl_iterate_phdr() isn't signal-safe and therefore there is currently
no way to safely unwind out of a signal-handler.  My proposal to make
dl_iterate_phdr() async-signal-safe seems to have fallen on deaf ears.

So what's your position?  Is the official position that glibc simply
cannot safely unwind out of a signal handler or do you have an
alternate proposal in mind?

Thanks,

	--david

References:
- is dl_iterate_phdr() supposed to be async-signal safe?
  - From: David Mosberger
- Re: is dl_iterate_phdr() supposed to be async-signal safe?
  - From: Roland McGrath
- Re: is dl_iterate_phdr() supposed to be async-signal safe?
  - From: David Mosberger

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]