Marc Lehmann wrote:
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 10:13:42AM -0800, Tim McClarren <[email protected]>
wrote:
SEGV does not get handled in a way that I would expect, so I wrote a
little test for it.
So what do you expect? There is no portable way to continue from
segfaults, and segfaults are asynchronous.
Yes. I was under the impression from the documentation that the purpose
of ev_signal was to attempt to deliver asynchronous signals synchronously.
I'm probably missing something obvious, or doing something wrong.
What you try to do makes no sense - segfaults are a serious issue, you
can't just pretend nothing has happened and continue (you would have to
*fix* the problem and tell your program where to continue afterwards).
I'm very well aware of that. I think you're assuming I'm trying to
recover gracefully from a SEGV. That is not what I'm trying to do.
Might I suggest, as an improvement, if what I'm trying to do makes no
sense that ev_signal_init not take SIGSEGV as a parameter and assert?
I am trying to emit a stack to the log. I've done this before, via the
usually sigaction route.
You need to write your own handler to do that.
I wanted to homogenize the signal handling, instead of handling some
signals asynchronously in signal handlers, and others via ev_signal.
_______________________________________________
libev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
