On 06/13, David Laight wrote:
>
> > And you interpret this as if a pending signal should be delivered in any
> > case,
> > even if pselect succeeds. Again, perhaps you are right, but to me this is
> > simply
> > undocumented.
>
> This text (from
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/V2_chap02.html) is
> moderately clear:
> ... if all threads within the process block delivery of the signal, the
> signal shall
> remain pending on the process until a thread calls a sigwait() function
> selecting that
> signal, a thread unblocks delivery of the signal, or the action
> associated with the signal
> is set to ignore the signal.
>
> So when pselect() 'replaces the signal mask' any pending signals should be
> delivered.
I fail to understand this logic.
> > However, linux never did this. Until the commit 854a6ed56839 ("signal: Add
> > restore_user_sigmask()"). This commit caused regression. We had to revert
> > it.
>
> That change wasn't expected to change the behaviour...
Yes.
And the changed behaviour matched your understanding of standard. We had to
change it back.
So what do you want from me? ;)
Oleg.
