From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 16 22:00:22 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F5B5106566C for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:00:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D8E88FC12 for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:00:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p0GM0J5n066899 for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:00:19 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p0GM0JuE066879; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:00:19 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:00:19 GMT Message-Id: <201101162200.p0GM0JuE066879@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Garrett Cooper Cc: Subject: Re: standards/92362: [headers] [patch] Missing SIGPOLL in kernel headers X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Garrett Cooper List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:00:22 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/92362; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Garrett Cooper To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, rmh@aybabtu.com Cc: standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: standards/92362: [headers] [patch] Missing SIGPOLL in kernel headers Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 13:50:00 -0800 The OP's claim is wrong. SIGIO is a signal that can be discarded, whereas SIGPOLL by definition terminates processes. From SUSv7 (pardon the poor formatting): The following signals shall be supported on all implementations (default actions are explained below the table): Signal Default Action Description SIGPOLL T Pollable event. T Abnormal termination of the process. The process is terminated with all the consequences of _exit() except that the status made available to wait() and waitpid() indicates abnormal termination by the specified signal. From signal(3) (pardon the poor formatting): 23 SIGIO discard signal I/O is possible on a descriptor (see fcntl(2)) SIGPOLL is actually somewhere between SIGIO and SIGIOT (SIBABRT), but there isn't a 1:1 mapping for the signal definition. This is also XSI Stream specific (which is not [fully] implemented in [Free]BSD). SIGIO is also used by fcntl(2) to denote when I/O is available, but this connotation is not noted in SUSv7 either. This item should probably be closed as WONTFIX as we don't implement SIGPOLL in its proper form. Thanks, -Garrett PS FWIW GNU/Linux needs to be educated on the fact that SIGIO is a discardable signal on other platforms and not an alias for SIGPOLL on BSD (especially when they use it as an alias but don't document the requirement >:(...), because a quick look at some glibc and Linux headers shows that they are using them as a 1:1 mapping (I am using Fedora 13 as a reference).