DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 54U959JL1015509
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 54U959JL1015509
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=NkIB1BPI
X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 1A642385840D
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1748595908;
	bh=q1h/aNlOycQRcNiFukq3KVTfPCjw4QVb77tpo83gG2w=;
	h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	From;
	b=NkIB1BPIjBwMMZxlTCKjVe0Pbkss1Ib8bQx7oyiVolV4PH1qTi0IvVfYFNqreBos1
	CB0LaB60U/W53gXU84eYyww4NeBwieT9YvYO93RD1QbgN4585Mc5LfL6j3WQljQGOx
	EHS17/w5FOCyYWvLFQwrvJox1TpgtXIQpQeIZq4I=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org C9A113858D39
ARC-Filter:	OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org C9A113858D39
ARC-Seal:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1748595848; cv=none;
	b=PUD4kBbOw02gef6gx3t3cDHQX0dp5joMLRDujXYpnccKYqt9MaxadC36dArxyvfeOAqb8x8Gpzru0dgM0N2QBYs5R52bndz5rtJhq9NESF+t2PdJuilPk4G9QFIUPktmNRdan8palnaVhjxRRedL0MrCvecoMamt7/COLWERvXY=
ARC-Message-Signature:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key;
	t=1748595848; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=/9wWAcvS7X8/alij7zrpO3XMumkWxUOK4w7Y6pOA5oc=;
	h=Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version;
	b=ajwiFVIWuxeIIhqUMN0nM3hQqXXUxBzOAYW7LAB3S85BsOQufPL6D0ZBGod//osoPdI75Wx9jfrhzrqgqop4+I1kRkEhr2XDl5dYUj5VuzkYMfAdXTaqaK41ZWlGGw5z5ipiEuVn1QNAqOQIbiT+Z6stEkJGyasxpikS8bqFVyY=
ARC-Authentication-Results:	i=1; server2.sourceware.org
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C9A113858D39
Subject:	Re: Crash or hang if SIGSEGV+SIGALRM are nested
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<c4335d1d-5394-2a41-f06b-feb5c9fb1398 AT t-online DOT de>
	<20250528215707 DOT ddb72fb28122c3ed07da8c5b AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<20250529102846 DOT 8144f502c3f17decbe6700c1 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<76940263-49e8-1b4a-17f2-11f5545014ab AT t-online DOT de>
	<20250530015410 DOT e8c4808c7947682b3309fbe7 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<32cf9316-3e97-7fab-f975-851c3dfc25b9 AT t-online DOT de>
	<20250530174730 DOT 7475a800c9f189b21ee0646e AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
Message-ID:	<29f9a32f-62bb-3540-ae3c-f58afe4148b5@t-online.de>
Date:	Fri, 30 May 2025 11:04:03 +0200
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101
	SeaMonkey/2.53.20
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20250530174730.7475a800c9f189b21ee0646e@nifty.ne.jp>
X-TOI-EXPURGATEID:	150726::1748595844-E4FF6965-ADCAB464/0/0 CLEAN NORMAL
X-TOI-MSGID:	a3205b13-101a-4b17-9783-0e570fe6bfdd
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.30
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From:	Christian Franke via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc:	Christian Franke <Christian DOT Franke AT t-online DOT de>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> On Thu, 29 May 2025 20:01:31 +0200
> Christian Franke wrote:
>> Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 May 2025 17:32:19 +0200
>>> Christian Franke wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> I still don't fully understand why a SIGSEGV triggered by an instruction
>>>> could interrupt a SIGALRM handler.
>>>> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/cygwin/2025-May/258145.html
>>>>
>>>> I guess such behavior is valid from the POSIX point of view, but it is
>>>> at least unexpected. If the SIGALRM handler is already running, it
>>>> should have interrupted the thread such that the instruction triggering
>>>> the segfault is not executed until the SIGALRM handler returns.
>>> I try to explain what is happing using the figure below.
>>>
>>>      <<<<<< Main thread >>>>>>                       < Signal Thread >
>>>                                               SIGNAL
>>>     main()   handler1() handler2()             QUEUE    wait_sig()
>>>       |          .          .                    |          |
>>>       |          .          .       ALRM         |          |
>>>       +----------------------------------------->|   ALRM   |
>>>       |          .          .       SEGV         +--------->|
>>>       X----------------------------------------->|          |
>>>       |          .       arm ALRM                |          |
>>>       +----------+ <----------------------------------------+
>>>                  |          .                    |   SEGV   |
>>>                  |          .                    +--------->|
>>>                  |          .                    |          |
>>>                  |          .      arm SEGV      |          |
>>>                  +----------+ <-----------------------------+
>>>                  .          |                    |          |
>>>            longjmp()        |                    |          |
>>>       +---------------------+                    |          |
>>>       |          .          .                    |          |
>>>       |          .          .                    |          |
>>>
>>> The point is the exception handler does not arm SIGSEGV handler
>>> directly. It just pushes the SIGSEGV into the signal queue.
>>> The signal thread reads the queue and process it asynchronously,
>>> and arms the handler().
>>>
>> I see. Thanks for nice explanation!
>>
>> I created an issue at stress-ng upstream because at least the --mprotect
>> test is affected:
>> https://github.com/ColinIanKing/stress-ng/issues/529
> Thanks!
>
> BTW, do you think this is the right thing?
> https://github.com/RISCV-Tools/stress-ng/commit/bf24393357cde137bb8e7b38f917f565946199fd
>
> I think the patch should set SIGSEGV mask on SIGALRM.

Indeed, I missed that, thanks! Reopen of the issue requested.

-- 
Regards,
Christian


-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -