This is the mail archive of the
glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
[Bug libc/4737] fork is not async-signal-safe
- From: "naesten at gmail dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: glibc-bugs at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 02:25:17 +0000
- Subject: [Bug libc/4737] fork is not async-signal-safe
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-4737-131 at http dot sourceware dot org/bugzilla/>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4737
Samuel Bronson <naesten at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |std-posix
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
CC| |naesten at gmail dot com
See Also| |https://bugzilla.redhat.com
| |/show_bug.cgi?id=906468
Resolution|WONTFIX |---
Assignee|drepper.fsp at gmail dot com |unassigned at sourceware dot org
--- Comment #24 from Samuel Bronson <naesten at gmail dot com> ---
Hmm, what we have now says:
> When the application calls fork() from a signal handler and any of the
> fork handlers registered by pthread_atfork() calls a function that is
> not async-signal-safe, the behavior is undefined.
I'm pretty sure this does *not* include whatever functions libc itself may
decide to install using the same mechanism, especially considering that fork is
*still* on the list of functions that must be async-signal-safe.
(Of course, listing it there is a bit of a lie, because fork() is clearly *not*
without restriction here.)
So it looks like the current behavior is not only buggy, but sub-standard.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.