Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 17:43:24 +0100 From: Christian Barthel <bch@online.de> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: siginfo_t content Message-ID: <87sgwpovdf.fsf@x230.onfire.org> In-Reply-To: <12fe52ea-1ab7-58b0-26d2-2c393570dd2f@FreeBSD.org> (John Baldwin's message of "Thu, 14 Feb 2019 12:20:45 -0800") References: <875ztmitqw.fsf@x230.onfire.org> <12fe52ea-1ab7-58b0-26d2-2c393570dd2f@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> writes: > See the siginfo(3) manpage. SI_TIMER is described there as: > > SI_TIMER signal generated by expiration of a > timer set by timer_settime(2) > > It is not for setitimer. Similarly, si_addr is usually only specified for > synchronous signals and usually holds the PC of the faulting instruction > except for SIGSEGV when it holds the faulting virtual address. Thanks for your reply. Ah, yes, siginfo(3) has more details on siginfo_t (missed that one; sorry). This clarifies my question. I've looked up the POSIX standard but I haven't seen a reason why si_addr is only set for SIGSEGV and "only" a few others - are there reasons for this? -- Christian Barthel <bch@online.de>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?87sgwpovdf.fsf>