This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


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

Re: Consensus on MT-, AS- and AC-Safety docs.


On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:58:05PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:21:02AM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > On 11/27/2013 08:46 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > On 11/27/2013 02:34 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > >>> I think we should do that in the code that wraps the signal
> > >>> handler call, to address this class of errors once and for all.
> > >>> Is this feasible?
> > >> 
> > >> On many architectures the signal trampoline is provided by the
> > >> kernel and so has no access to libc implementation details like
> > >> errno.  As far as I understand, even when provided by libc all it
> > >> does is call the sigreturn syscall and provide appropriate unwind
> > >> information for the registers the kernel saved on the stack - that
> > >> is, there is no userspace code called before the signal handler
> > >> that would have a chance to save errno.
> > > 
> > > The number of signals is fixed and small, so it should be feasible to
> > > install our own handler in the kernel and store the user-supplied
> > > handler in a lookup table that gets called from our handler.  There
> > > might be a slight performance impact, though.
> > > 
> > > But if we think this errno issue is serious, rather than patching
> > > almost any signal handler out there right now, we should address it
> > > in glibc.
> > 
> > All we need to do is extend the kernel infrastructure to create
> > a signal entry trampoline like it does for signal return. This isn't
> > impossible, but requires work.
> 
> Kernel help is not required for this. You just set set the signal
> handler address to your wrapper in libc when making the rt_sigaction
> syscall, and then have the wrapper call the real signal handler
> function, whose address is stored in userspace. There are some nasty
> atomicity/synchronization issues to cover with the race window between
> the rt_sigaction syscall (which might change flags affecting how the
> signal handler runs even though the new handler address will always be
> the same) and replacing the pointer in userspace, and keeping this
> entire operation AS-safe, but I'm pretty sure it's possible.
> 
Well with changing kernel it suffices to add a void * field extra to
sigaction, siginfo and sigevent structures and make kernel write into
siginfo value that was passed in sigaction.

We could pass real siginfo structure in this argument and call
appropriate function.

This would allow adding flags that can be implemented solely in
userspace, also ON_STACK, SIGEV_THREAD could be implemented without
kernel involvement.


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