Re: Fix signal handler

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>
> No, it's not a sig_atomic_t, but it is assignment of a single function
> pointer that is properly declared as volatile. Is this actually a
> problem on any known system?
>   

Is it guaranteed to work on all supported software environments that an
address can be atomically set?


> If you want to nit-pick, there are much worse cases. For example, in
> diff.c, we do quite a bit of work in remove_tempfile_on_signal.
>   

Thanks that you point out another open issue.


> It assumes that char* assignment is atomic, but nothing is even marked as
> volatile. But again, is this actually a problem on any system?
>   

Would you like to provide software implementations that work by design?

Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]