[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-625?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12539499
]
Martin Sebor commented on STDCXX-625:
-------------------------------------
I think it's a matter of correctness. Calling signal() the way we have been
(including after applying the patch) leaves open the possibility for one of the
signals to get lost if it arrives in the brief window after the handler has
been reset and before we've had a chance to install it again. Another reason
why I suggested sigaction is the recent berakage in exec on Linux -- see
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=590510.
Unfortunately, though, we can't use sigaction unconditionally. When using EDG
eccp in strict mode (with ourt pure C headers) the struct or the function
aren't declared. Look at rev 590510 for how I had to hack around it there (and
even that's not the end of it if we want the function to be reliable with EDG
eccp on Linux).
> 0.process test fails with SEGV due to stack overflow
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: STDCXX-625
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-625
> Project: C++ Standard Library
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Tests
> Affects Versions: 4.2
> Environment: HP-UX or AIX platforms
> Reporter: Travis Vitek
> Assignee: Travis Vitek
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 4.2.1
>
> Attachments: stdcxx-625.patch, stdcxx-625v2.patch, test.cpp
>
>
> It appears that when we re-register for the signal from within the user
> signal handler the user signal handler is immediately invoked again. This
> recursion causes a stack overflow and a crash. Here is the stack on AIX....
> sig_handler(int)( = 20), line 528 in "process.cpp"
> sigaction(??, ??, ??) at 0xd01fa358
> signal(??, ??) at 0xd02759a8
> sig_handler(int)( = 20), line 528 in "process.cpp"
> sigaction(??, ??, ??) at 0xd01fa358
> signal(??, ??) at 0xd02759a8
> sig_handler(int)( = 20), line 528 in "process.cpp"
> nsleep(??, ??) at 0xd01fa1d4
> sleep(??) at 0xd02051d4
> unnamed block $b656, line 553 in "process.cpp"
> rw_waitpid(long,int*,int)(pid = 782442, result = 0x2ff226a0, timeout = 5),
> line 553 in "process.cpp"
> join_test(long,bool)(pid = 782442, should_hang = false), line 51 in
> "0.process.cpp"
> test_process_create1()(), line 109 in "0.process.cpp"
> run_test(int,char**)(argc = 1, argv = 0x2ff22a60), line 276 in "0.process.cpp"
> rw_vtest(int,char**,const char*,const char*,const
> char*,int(*)(int,char**),const char*,char*)(argc = 1, argv = 0x2ff22a60,
> file_name = "/amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/self/0.process.cpp", clause
> = "0.process", comment = "", fun = 0x2000b85c, optstr = "|-child#0
> |-timeout#", va = " "), line 1030 in "driver.cpp"
> rw_test(int,char**,const char*,const char*,const
> char*,int(*)(int,char**),const char*,...)(argc = 1, argv = 0x2ff22a60, fname
> = "/amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/self/0.process.cpp", clause =
> "0.process", comment = "", testfun = 0x2000b85c, optstr = "|-child#0
> |-timeout#", ... = 0x20009608), line 1128 in "driver.cpp"
> main(argc = 1, argv = 0x2ff22a60), line 299 in "0.process.cpp"
> Here is the stack on HP-UX
> #0 sig_handler (No.Identifier=18) at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/src/process.cpp:529
> #1 <signal handler called>
> #2 0x7b0086c0 in _sigvector+0x10 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #3 0x7b00f114 in signalvector+0xac () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #4 0x7b00f020 in signal+0xa0 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #5 0x187fc in sig_handler (No.Identifier=18) at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/src/process.cpp:529
> #6 <signal handler called>
> #7 0x7b0086c0 in _sigvector+0x10 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #8 0x7b00f114 in signalvector+0xac () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #9 0x7b00f020 in signal+0xa0 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #10 0x187fc in sig_handler (No.Identifier=18) at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/src/process.cpp:529
> #11 <signal handler called>
> #12 0x7b0086c0 in _sigvector+0x10 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #13 0x7b00f114 in signalvector+0xac () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #14 0x7b00f020 in signal+0xa0 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #15 0x187fc in sig_handler (No.Identifier=18) at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/src/process.cpp:529
> #16 <signal handler called>
> #17 0x7b0086c0 in _sigvector+0x10 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #18 0x7b00f114 in signalvector+0xac () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #19 0x7b00f020 in signal+0xa0 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #20 0x187fc in sig_handler (No.Identifier=18) at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/src/process.cpp:529
> #21 <signal handler called>
> #22 0x7b00a160 in __sigtimedwait_sys+0x10 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #23 0x7b013c84 in sigtimedwait+0x6c () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #24 0x7afa2a50 in sleep+0xe8 () from /usr/lib/libc.2
> #25 0x188f0 in rw_waitpid (pid=13825, result=0x7f7f0db0, timeout=5)
> at /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/src/process.cpp:555
> #26 0x15250 in join_test (pid=13825, should_hang=false) at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/self/0.process.cpp:51
> #27 0x15424 in test_process_create1 () at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/self/0.process.cpp:109
> #28 0x159b4 in run_test (argc=1, argv=0x7f7f08d4) at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/self/0.process.cpp:276
> #29 0x16d1c in rw_vtest (argc=1, argv=0x7f7f08d4,
> file_name=0x8e090
> "/amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/self/0.process.cpp", clause=0x8e528
> "0.process",
> comment=0x8e08f "", fun=0x4001ed52 <run_test(int, char **)>,
> optstr=0x8e534 "|-child#0 |-timeout#", va=0x7f7f0a34)
> at /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/src/driver.cpp:1030
> #30 0x171ec in rw_test (argc=1, argv=0x7f7f08d4, fname=0x8e090
> "/amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/self/0.process.cpp",
> clause=0x8e528 "0.process", comment=0x8e08f "", testfun=0x4001ed52
> <run_test(int, char **)>,
> optstr=0x8e534 "|-child#0 |-timeout#") at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/src/driver.cpp:1127
> #31 0x15ad4 in main (argc=1, argv=0x7f7f08d4) at
> /amd/devco/vitek/stdcxx-trunk/tests/self/0.process.cpp:299
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
