Re: [patch-2.3.29] bugfix for pipe(2) system call.

Guest section DW (dwguest@win.tue.nl)
Fri, 26 Nov 1999 01:39:47 +0100

On Thu, Nov 25, 1999 at 03:13:06PM +0000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> > > it just occurred to me - there is even better solution. We can do the same
> > > as SCO UnixWare 7.1.0 does. I.e. to send SIGSEGV to the offender. This
> > > way:
> >
> > Well, SuS says: EFAULT when filedes (array) is invalid.
> > Of course SuS just codifies classical behaviour, and
> > that was the way.. SEGV is - somewhat - radical response..
>
> SuSv2 says nothing of the kind (the copy in my /usr/doc/ i.e.). Where did
> you get that from? Mine only mandates EMFILE and ENFILE.

Well, there is the generic (page 34 in the latest draft)

[EFAULT]
Bad address. The system detected an invalid address in attempting to use
an argument of a call. The reliable detection of this error cannot be
guaranteed, and when not detected may result in the generation of a signal,
indicating an address violation, which is sent to the process.

valid for all calls. That is: if the kernel notices the bad address
it must return EFAULT. If not, e.g. because the routine is implemented
in libc, then one may get SEGV.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/