Re: Handling of USR2 signal in JVM on Linux

On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 1:05 AM Thomas Stüfe wrote: >> >> >> > > >> > > I see your point. I dislike crashes, especially ones they can be >> > > reliably triggered from outside. You never can be sure about the >> > > security implications either. >> > > >> > > If you dislike ignoring the signal,

Re: Handling of USR2 signal in JVM on Linux

> > > > > > > > I see your point. I dislike crashes, especially ones they can be > > > reliably triggered from outside. You never can be sure about the > > > security implications either. > > > > > > If you dislike ignoring the signal, and since the default action for > > > SIGUSR1+2 is process

Re: Handling of USR2 signal in JVM on Linux

On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 8:17 AM David Holmes wrote: > On 16/06/2022 12:09 am, Thomas Stüfe wrote: > > On Wed 15. Jun 2022 at 15:06, David Holmes > > wrote: > > Nor do I. SIGUSR2 is reserved for use by the VM and we document > > that. If > > you start

Re: Handling of USR2 signal in JVM on Linux

On 16/06/2022 12:09 am, Thomas Stüfe wrote: On Wed 15. Jun 2022 at 15:06, David Holmes > wrote: On 15/06/2022 8:45 pm, Thomas Stüfe wrote: > More specifically, I propose to gracefully ignore SIGUSR2 in release > builds if the receiving thread is not