make open() return when signal is caught - c

When I call open("./fifo",O_RDONLY), the syscall will block because no one is writing to the fifo ./fifo. If a signal is received during that time that has no signal handler, the process ends instantly. So far so good.
But when a signal is received that has a signal handler, the signal handler is executed and the open() syscall is still blocking.
How can I make open() return when I catch the signal?
I tried to block the signal, that does not work because there is no sigmask argument for open() like there is for pselect(). Using O_NONBLOCK does not work either, because then open() will return with an error, whether there is a signal or not. Removing the signal handler is also no good because I want to be able to react to the signal.
My test code:
#include <errno.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stddef.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
static volatile bool end=0;
static void catchSignal(int signal)
{
(void)signal;
const char *s="Catched Signal\n";
write(STDERR_FILENO,s,strlen(s));
end=1;
}
static int openFile(void)
{
int fd=open("./in",O_RDONLY);
if(fd<0)
{
perror("can't open file");
exit(1);
}
return fd;
}
int main()
{
if(SIG_ERR==signal(SIGTERM,catchSignal))
{
perror("cant set up signal handler");
return -1;
}
int fd = openFile();
while(end==0)
{
puts("Still running");
usleep(300UL*1000);
}
puts("End now");
if(fd>0)
{
close(fd);
}
return 0;
}

The signal() function is problematic because of a history of implementations with different details. According to its Linux manual page:
The only portable use of signal() is to set a signal's disposition to SIG_DFL or SIG_IGN. The semantics when using signal() to establish a signal handler vary across systems (and POSIX.1 explicitly permits this variation); do not use it for this purpose.
(Emphasis in the original)
Instead of signal(), you should be using sigaction():
struct sigaction sa = { .sa_handler = catchSignal };
if (SIG_ERR == sigaction(SIGTERM, &sa, NULL))
Note that among the fields of a struct sigaction is sa_flags, a bitmask with which you can select among the various behaviors historically implemented by different versions of signal(). In particular, if you do not include the SA_RESTART flag, as the above indeed does not, then you should not see system calls automatically resume when interrupted by a signal (except for those few that are explicitly specified to do so).

When you strace your program, you see that signal() functions sets SA_RESTART flag for the signal:
rt_sigaction(SIGTERM, {sa_handler=0x562f2a8c3249, sa_mask=[TERM], sa_flags=SA_RESTORER|SA_RESTART, sa_restorer=0x7fb504d2d210}, {sa_handler=SIG_DFL, sa_mask=[], sa_flags=0}, 8) = 0
meaning, that the open() syscall will be automatically restarted after handling the signal.
You can use sigaction() to have more fine-grained control over signal handling and not set the SA_RESTART:
struct sigaction sa;
memset (&sa, 0, sizeof (sa));
sa.sa_handler = catchSignal;
sa.sa_flags = 0;
sigemptyset (&sa.sa_mask);
if (sigaction (SIGTERM, &sa, NULL) == -1) {
perror("sigaction");
return -1;
}

you can use O_NONBLOCK in which case open() will return immediately, and you will block as soon as you fcntl(2) cancelling the O_NONBLOCK.
Read the man page, as probably you have some way to make open(2) return -1 and errno equal to EINTR. But the normal usage is what has been described, the call is reissued, so the signal handler doesn't make the calll to be interrupted (much code depends on this behaviour). I'm not sure about this, but I think only pause(2) and select(2) and friends are interrupted (and return) when a non-ignored signal is received.
Is worth noting that only the thread that is blocked in an interruptible call and receives the signal is awaken and the call interrupted, and the thread receiving the interrupt can be any of the ones you have started in your process.

Related

pselect() on Linux does not deliver signals if events are pending

I'm trying to add a signal handler for proper cleanup to my event-driven application.
My signal handler for SIGINT only changes the value of a global flag variable, which is then checked in the main loop. To avoid races, the signal is blocked at all times, except during the pselect() call. This should cause pending signals to be delivered only during the pselect() call, which should be interrupted and fail with EINTR.
This usually works fine, except if there are already events pending on the monitored file descriptors (e.g. under heavy load, when there's always activity on the file descriptors).
This sample program reproduces the problem:
#include <assert.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/select.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <unistd.h>
volatile sig_atomic_t stop_requested = 0;
void handle_signal(int sig)
{
// Use write() and strlen() instead of printf(), which is not async-signal-safe
const char * out = "Caught stop signal. Exiting.\n";
size_t len = strlen (out);
ssize_t writelen = write(STDOUT_FILENO, out, len);
assert(writelen == (ssize_t) len);
stop_requested = 1;
}
int main(void)
{
int ret;
// Install signal handler
{
struct sigaction sa;
memset(&sa, 0, sizeof(sa));
sa.sa_handler = handle_signal;
ret = sigaction(SIGINT, &sa, NULL);
assert(ret == 0);
}
// Block SIGINT
sigset_t old_sigmask;
{
sigset_t blocked;
sigemptyset(&blocked);
sigaddset(&blocked, SIGINT);
ret = sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, &blocked, &old_sigmask);
assert(ret == 0);
}
ret = raise(SIGINT);
assert(ret == 0);
// Create pipe and write data to it
int pipefd[2];
ret = pipe(pipefd);
assert(ret == 0);
ssize_t writelen = write(pipefd[1], "foo", 3);
assert(writelen == 3);
while (stop_requested == 0)
{
printf("Calling pselect().\n");
fd_set fds;
FD_ZERO(&fds);
FD_SET(pipefd[0], &fds);
struct timespec * timeout = NULL;
int ret = pselect(pipefd[0] + 1, &fds, NULL, NULL, timeout, &old_sigmask);
assert(ret >= 0 || errno == EINTR);
printf("pselect() returned %d.\n", ret);
if (FD_ISSET(pipefd[0], &fds))
printf("pipe is readable.\n");
sleep(1);
}
printf("Event loop terminated.\n");
}
This program installs a handler for SIGINT, then blocks SIGINT, sends SIGINT to itself (which will not be delivered yet because SIGINT is blocked), creates a pipe and writes some data into the pipe, and then monitors the read end of the pipe for readability.
This readability monitoring is done using pselect(), which is supposed to unblock SIGINT, which should then interrupt the pselect() and call the signal handler.
However, on Linux (I tested on 5.6 and 4.19), the pselect() call returns 1 instead and indicates readability of the pipe, without calling the signal handler. Since this test program does not read the data that was written to the pipe, the file descriptor will never cease to be readable, and the signal handler is never called. In real programs, a similar situation might arise under heavy load, where a lot of data might be available for reading on different file descriptors (e.g. sockets).
On the other hand, on FreeBSD (I tested on 12.1), the signal handler is called, and then pselect() returns -1 and sets errno to EINTR. This is what I expected to happen on Linux as well.
Am I misunderstanding something, or am I using these interfaces incorrectly? Or should I just fall back to the old self-pipe trick, which (I believe) would handle this case better?
This is a type of resource starvation caused by always checking for active resources in the same order. When resources are always checked in the same order, if the resources checked first are busy enough the resources checked later may never get any attention.
See What is starvation?.
The Linux implementation of pselect() apparently checks file descriptors before checking for signals. The BSD implementation does the opposite.
For what it's worth, the POSIX documentation for pselect() states:
If none of the selected descriptors are ready for the requested operation, the pselect() or select() function shall block until at least one of the requested operations becomes ready, until the timeout occurs, or until interrupted by a signal.
A strict reading of that description requires checking the descriptors first. If any descriptor is active, pselect() will return that instead of failing with errno set to EINTR.
In that case, if the descriptors are so busy that one is always active, the signal processing gets starved.
The BSD implementation likely starves active descriptors if signals come in too fast.
One common solution is to always process all active resources every time a select() call or similar returns. But you can't do that with your current design that mixes signals with descriptors because pselect() doesn't even get to checking for a pending signal if there are active descriptors. As #Shawn mentioned in the comments, you can map signals to file descriptors using signalfd(). Then add the descriptor from signalfd() to the file descriptor set passed to pselect().

How to cancel waitpid if child has no status change?

Disclaimer: Absolute newbie in C, i was mostly using Java before.
In many C beginner tutorials, waitpid is used in process management examples to wait for its child processes to finish (or have a status change using options like WUNTRACED). However, i couldn't find any information about how to continue if no such status change occurs, either by direct user input or programmatic (e.g. timeout). So what is a good way to undo waitpid? Something like SIGCONT for stopped processes, but instead for processes delayed by waitpid.
Alternatively if the idea makes no sense, it would be interesting to know why.
How about if I suggest using alarm()? alarm() delivers SIGALRM after the countdown passes (See alarm() man page for more details). But from the signals man page, SIGALRM default disposition is to terminate the process. So, you need to register a signal handler for handling the SIGALRM. Code follows like this...
#include <unistd.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
void sigalrm(int signo)
{
return; // Do nothing !
}
int main()
{
struct sigaction act, oldact;
act.sa_handler = sigalrm; // Set the signal handler
sigemptyset(&act.sa_mask);
act.sa_flags = 0;
#ifdef SA_INTERRUPT // If interrupt defined set it to prevent the auto restart of sys-call
act.sa_flags |= SA_INTERRUPT;
#endif
sigaction(SIGALRM, &act, &oldact);
pid_t fk_return = fork();
if (fk_return == 0) { // Child never returns
for( ; ; );
}
unsigned int wait_sec = 5;
alarm(wait_sec); // Request for SIGALRM
time_t start = time(NULL);
waitpid(-1, NULL, 0);
int tmp_errno = errno; // save the errno state, it may be modified in between function calls.
time_t end = time(NULL);
alarm(0); // Clear a pending alarm
sigaction(SIGALRM, &oldact, NULL);
if (tmp_errno == EINTR) {
printf("Child Timeout, waited for %d sec\n", end - start);
kill(fk_return, SIGINT);
exit(1);
}
else if (tmp_errno != 0) // Some other fatal error
exit(1);
/* Proceed further */
return 0;
}
OUTPUT
Child Timeout, waited for 5 sec
Note: You don't need to worry about SIGCHLD because its default disposition is to ignore.
EDIT
For the completeness, it is guaranteed that SIGALRM is not delivered to the child. This is from the man page of alarm()
Alarms created by alarm() are preserved across execve(2) and are not inherited by children created via fork(2).
EDIT 2
I don't know why it didn't strike me at first. A simple approach would be to block SIGCHLD and call sigtimedwait() which supports timeout option. The code goes like this...
#include <unistd.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
int main()
{
sigset_t sigmask;
sigemptyset(&sigmask);
sigaddset(&sigmask, SIGCHLD);
sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, &sigmask, NULL);
pid_t fk_return = fork();
if (fk_return == 0) { // Child never returns
for( ; ; );
}
if (sigtimedwait(&sigmask, NULL, &((struct timespec){5, 0})) < 0) {
if (errno == EAGAIN) {
printf("Timeout\n");
kill(fk_return, SIGINT);
exit(1);
}
}
waitpid(fk_return, NULL, 0); // Child should have terminated by now.
/* Proceed further */
return 0;
}
OUTPUT
Timeout
The third argument to waitpid takes a set of flags. You want to include the WNOHANG flag, which tells waitpid to return immediately if no child process has exited.
After adding this option, you would sit in a loop a sleep for some period of time and try again if nothing has exited. Repeat until either a child has returned or until your timeout has passed.
Waiting for process to die on a typical Unix system is an absolute PITA. The portable way would be to use various signals to interrupt wait function: SIGALARM for timeout, SIGTERM/SIGINT and others for "user input" event. This relies on a global state and thus might be impossible to do.
The non-portable way would be to use pidfd_open with poll/epoll on Linux, kqueue with a EVFILT_PROC filter on BSDs.
Note that on Linux this allows waiting for a process to terminate, you will still have to retrieve status via waitid with P_PIDFD.
If you still want to mix in "user events", add signalfd to the list of descriptors on Linux or EVFILT_SIGNAL filter of kqueue on BSDs.
Another possible solution is to spawn a "process reaper" thread which is responsible for reaping of all processes and setting some event in a process object of your choice: futex word, eventfd etc. Waiting on such objects can be done with a timeout. This requires everyone to agree to use the same interface for process spawning which might or might not be reasonable. Afaik Java implementations use this strategy.

How to write a test case to verify EINTR returned by sem_wait function in linux

I have just written the below routine to handle the EINTR error.
The routine is given below,
while((s = sem_wait(&w4compl)) == -1)
{
if (errno == EINTR)
{
perror("call interrupted by sig. handler\n");
continue;
}
else
printf("Other Error Generated\n");
}
SO, here i am not able to see the print "call interrupted by sig. handler\n" statement. How can test this so that it will print the same(How can i execute the part of if (errno == EINTR)).
Install a signal handler, and cause a signal to be delivered (using alarm(), setitimer(), or timer_create()+timer_settime()), so that the delivery of the signal will interrupt the sem_wait() call.
Consider this example program:
#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200809L
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <semaphore.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <errno.h>
static void dummy_handler(int signum)
{
}
static int install_dummy_handler(int signum)
{
struct sigaction act;
memset(&act, 0, sizeof act);
sigemptyset(&act.sa_mask);
act.sa_handler = dummy_handler;
act.sa_flags = 0;
return sigaction(signum, &act, NULL);
}
static const char *errname(const int errnum)
{
switch (errnum) {
case EINTR: return "EINTR";
case EINVAL: return "EINVAL";
default: return "(other)";
}
}
int main(void)
{
sem_t s;
if (install_dummy_handler(SIGALRM) == -1) {
fprintf(stderr, "Cannot install ARLM signal handler: %s.\n", strerror(errno));
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
sem_init(&s, 0, 0);
alarm(1);
if (sem_wait(&s) == -1) {
const int errnum = errno;
printf("sem_wait() failed with errno == %s (%d; %s).\n",
errname(errnum), errnum, strerror(errnum));
} else
printf("sem_wait() succeeded.\n");
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
In main(), we install a signal handler for the SIGALRM signal. It does not matter if the signal handler function does anything at all, because it is the delivery of the signal that causes "slow" syscalls to return with EINTR error. (As long as the SA_RESTART flag was not used when that handler was installed. If you look at act.sa_mask in install_dummy_handler(), you'll see we used no flags at all. All the flags and sigaction() usage are described in the man 2 sigaction man page.)
In main(), we first initialize our semaphore, then set an alarm for one second. When the real, wall-clock time has elapsed, the SIGALRM signal is raised.
Do note that although SIGALRM is just fine for this example and similar purposes, you'll probably want to use POSIX per-process interval timers instead.
Next, we simply call sem_wait() on the semaphore, and examine the result. In practice, if you compile and run the above example.c using e.g.
gcc -Wall -O2 example.c -lpthread -o example
./example
the program will output
sem_wait() failed with errno == EINTR (4; Interrupted system call).
after one second.
Just about any system call on Linux can return EINTR if the system call is interrupted.
From the man page (emphasis mine):
sem_wait() decrements (locks) the semaphore pointed to by sem. If
the semaphore's value is greater than zero, then the decrement
proceeds, and the function returns, immediately. If the semaphore
currently has the value zero, then the call blocks until either it
becomes possible to perform the decrement (i.e., the semaphore value
rises above zero), or a signal handler interrupts the call.
To trigger this case, you should make sure that the sem_wait system call is blocked (waiting), and then send a signal (which has a handler) to the thread.
Some psuedo-code:
sigint_handler:
return
thread2:
<Your while loop from the question>
main:
signal(SIGINT, sigint_handler) // Setup signal handler
sem_wait(&w4compl)
t2 = start_thread(thread2)
sleep(5) // Hack to make sure thread2 is blocked
pthread_kill(t2, SIGINT)

How to restore original signal handling properties in C

Tried my best to figure this out on my own, but I really do not want to continue tampering with things that I do not fully understand. So for a programming assignment I have to do in C, I need to terminate a program upon the user entering CTRL+D key stroke via a terminal. I tried to isolate that functionality in a smaller test function, but now my CTRL+D behaves as my CTRL+C and CTRL+C does not have any effect, even outside of the program when it finishes executing. This is the program that caused this change:
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <termios.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void ctrlD(int sig){
printf("\n");
signal(SIGINT, SIG_DFL);
exit(0);
}
int main(){
signal(SIGINT, ctrlD);
while(1) {
printf("Hello\n");
sleep(5);
}
}
The line signal(SIGINT, SIG_DFL); was added afterward upon realizing my CTRL+C no longer worked. I thought it would return the keystrokes to their original functionalities, but to no avail. What do I do to get back the original functionalities while also making this program work with CTRL+D?
***EDIT: This question seems to have gone off the rails a bit. I get now that Ctrl+D is not a signal. Nonetheless, I no longer have the functionality of Ctrl+C anymore when attempting to use it in my MAC OS terminal, and instead Ctrl+D seems to have that exact functionality. HOW exactly can I return each to have the functionality that they had before I went on this haphazard journey?
If your intention is to restore signal's default behavior after executing handler then, pass SA_RESETHAND flag to sa_flags while registering signal action. For example.
struct sigaction act;
memset(&act, 0, sizeof(struct sigaction));
act.sa_flags = SA_RESETHAND;
act.sa_handler = some_handler;
sigaction(SIGINT, &act, NULL);
From sigaction() man
SA_RESETHAND
Restore the signal action to the default upon entry to the signal handler. This flag is meaningful only when
establishing a signal handler.
If you write a program to explore signals, it is much better to write it carefully, using proper POSIX interfaces (sigaction() instead of signal()), and avoiding undefined behaviour (using non-async-signal safe functions in a signal handler).
Consider, for example, the following program:
#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200809L
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <time.h>
#include <errno.h>
static volatile sig_atomic_t sigint_count = 0;
static void catch_sigint(int signum)
{
if (signum == SIGINT)
sigint_count++;
}
static int install_sigint(void)
{
struct sigaction act;
memset(&act, 0, sizeof act);
sigemptyset(&act.sa_mask);
act.sa_handler = catch_sigint;
act.sa_flags = 0;
if (sigaction(SIGINT, &act, NULL) == -1)
return errno;
return 0;
}
static int install_default(const int signum)
{
struct sigaction act;
memset(&act, 0, sizeof act);
sigemptyset(&act.sa_mask);
act.sa_handler = SIG_DFL;
act.sa_flags = 0;
if (sigaction(signum, &act, NULL) == -1)
return errno;
return 0;
}
int main(void)
{
struct timespec duration;
int result;
if (install_sigint()) {
fprintf(stderr, "Cannot install SIGINT handler: %s.\n", strerror(errno));
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
duration.tv_sec = 5;
duration.tv_nsec = 0; /* 1/1000000000ths of a second. Nine zeroes. */
printf("Sleeping for %d seconds.\n", (int)duration.tv_sec);
fflush(stdout);
while (1) {
result = nanosleep(&duration, &duration);
if (!result)
break;
if (errno != EINTR) {
fprintf(stderr, "nanosleep() failed: %s.\n", strerror(errno));
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
/* nanosleep was interrupted by a delivery of a signal. */
if (sigint_count >= 3) {
/* Ctrl+C pressed three or more times. */
if (install_default(SIGINT) == -1) {
fprintf(stderr, "Cannot revert SIGINT to the default handler: %s.\n", strerror(errno));
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
printf("SIGINT has been reverted to the default handler.\n");
fflush(stderr);
}
}
if (sigint_count > 0)
printf("You pressed Ctrl+C %d time%s.\n", (int)sigint_count, (sigint_count > 1) ? "s" : "");
else
printf("You did not press Ctrl+C at all.\n");
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
The #define tells your C library (glibc in particular) that you want POSIX.1-2008 (and later) features from it.
The INT signal handler only increments a volatile sig_atomic_t counter. Note that this type may have a very small range it can represent; 0 to 127, inclusive, should be safe.
The main program waits using the POSIX nanosleep() function. On some systems, sleep() may be implemented via the SIGALRM function, so it is better avoided when using signals otherwise; nanosleep() does not interfere with signals like that at all. Plus, nanosleep() can return the amount of time remaining, if it is interrupted by a signal delivery.
In the main loop, nanosleep() will return 0, if it has slept the entire interval (but note that it may not update the remaining time to 0 in this case). If it is interrupted by the delivery of a signal, it will return -1 with errno == EINTR, and the remaining time updated. (The first pointer is to the duration of the sleep, and the second is to where the remaining time should be stored. You can use the same structure for both.)
Normally, the main loop does only one iteration. It can do more than one iteration, if it is interrupted by the delivery of a signal.
When the main loop detects that sigint_count is at least three, i.e. it has received at least three INT signals, it resets the signal handler back to default.
(Note that both the memset() and the sigemptyset() are important when clearing the struct sigaction structure. The memset() ensures that future code is backwards compatible with older code, by ensuring even padding fields are cleared. And sigemptyset() is the safe way to clear the signal mask (set of signals blocked while the handler runs).)
(In theory, memset() is not async-signal-safe, while both sigemptyset() and sigaction() are. This is why I reset the signal handler in the main program, and not in the signal handler.)
If you want to print from a signal handler, you need to use low-level I/O, because <stdio.h> functions are not async-signal safe. For example, you can use the following function to print strings to standard output:
static int wrerr(const char *p)
{
const int saved_errno = errno;
int retval = 0;
if (p) {
const char *q = p;
ssize_t n;
while (*q)
q++;
while (p < q) {
n = write(STDERR_FILENO, p, (size_t)(q - p));
if (n > 0)
p += n;
else
if (n != -1) {
retval = EIO;
break;
} else
if (errno != EINTR) {
retval = errno;
break;
}
}
}
errno = saved_errno;
return retval;
}
The above wrerr() function is async-signal safe (because it only uses async-signal safe functions itself), and it even keeps errno unchanged. (Many guides forget to mention that it is quite important for a signal handler to keep errno unchanged. Otherwise, when a function is interrupted by a signal handler, and that signal handler modifies errno, the original function will return -1 to indicate an error, but then errno is no longer EINTR!)
You can just use wrerr("INT signal!\n") if you want. The return value from wrerr() is zero if the write was successful, and an errno error code otherwise. It ignores interrupts itself.
Do note that you should not mix stderr output via fprintf() or other <stdio.h> functions with the above (except perhaps for printing error messages when the program aborts). Mixing them is not undefined behaviour, it just may yield surprising results, like wrerr() output appearing in the midst of a fprintf(stderr,...) output.
Its because of exit(0) statement in the handler, when SIGINT is raised, handler strlD gets called and you might thinking why signal(SIGINT,SIG_DFL) didn't work ? Actually it works. But your main process a.out get terminated successfully there itself by calling exit(0). remove exit(0) if you want to restore the behavior of SIGINT.
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <termios.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void ctrlD(int sig){
//printf("CTRL+C pressed\n");/* just to observe I added one printf
statement, Ideally there shouldn't be any printf here */
signal(SIGINT, SIG_DFL);/*restoring back to original action */
}
int main(){
signal(SIGINT, ctrlD);/*1st time when CTRL+C pressed, handler ctrlD gets called */
while(1) {
printf("Hello\n");
sleep(5);
}
return 0;
}
Also its advisable to use sigaction() instead of signal() as told here What is the difference between sigaction and signal? . Read man 2 sigaction and man 2 exit to check what exit(0) means.
Also this How to avoid using printf in a signal handler?
Edit :
void ctrlD(int sig){
/* printf("CTRL+C pressed \n"); */
signal(SIGINT, SIG_DFL); /* only one time CTRL+C works
after that SIG_DFL will terminate whole process */
}
int main(){
signal(SIGINT, ctrlD); /* if you press CTRL+C then it will go to handler
and terminate */
int ch;
while( ((ch = getchar())!=EOF) ) { /* wait or read char until CTrl+D is not pressed */
printf("Hello : %d \n",ch);/* ASCII equivalent of char */
}
return 0;
}
Thank you everyone who contributed to this question. The resources provided/linked were tremendously helpful in learning more about signals (and that EOF isn't a signal), among the other wealth of information provided.
After some more research, I found out that somehow, either through some accidental bash command gone awry, or perhaps the program posted in my original question itself, I had altered the key mappings for my terminal's stty settings. If anyone finds themselves in this oddly specific situation in the future, I hope this can be of help, as it is what fixed my problem:
Enter the command $ stty -a to see all of your terminals settings, specifically the "cchars" section.
I then saw the reversal, and fixed it like so:
$ stty intr ^C
$ stty eof ^D
Then you can run $ stty -a once again to see that the changes have properly taken effect. Once again, thanks everyone.

System calls and EINTR error code

Is there any expert out there that can help me with the following?
I have the following system calls in C:
access()
unlink()
setsockopt()
fcntl()
setsid()
socket()
bind()
listen()
I want to know if they may fail with error code -1 and errno EINTR/EAGAIN.
Should I have to handle EINTR/EAGAIN for these?
The documentation do not refer anything related to EINTR/EAGAIN but many people I see handle it.
Which is the correct?
Here is how I register signal handlers : https://gitorious.org/zepto-web-server/zepto-web-server/source/b1b03b9ecccfe9646e34caf3eb04689e2bbc54dd:src/signal-dispatcher-utility.c
With this configuration: https://gitorious.org/zepto-web-server/zepto-web-server/source/b1b03b9ecccfe9646e34caf3eb04689e2bbc54dd:src/server-signals-support-utility.c
Also here is a commit that I added some EINTR/EAGAIN handling in some system calls that I know that return EINTR or EAGAIN : https://gitorious.org/zepto-web-server/zepto-web-server/commit/b1b03b9ecccfe9646e34caf3eb04689e2bbc54dd
Unless you install an interrupting signal handler (one installed with sigaction omitting the SA_RESTART flag, or one installed with the signal function on some systems) you should not expect to see EINTR at all.
Among your particular list of functions, I don't see any that could experience EINTR anyway except fcntl, and for it, only when it's used for locking. The link in John's answer should be helpful answering questions about specific functions, though.
See http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/signal.7.html -- start reading near the bottom where it talks about "Interruption of system calls and library functions..." This is a Linux man page, but the info is pretty generally applicable to any Unix/Posix/Linux-flavored system.
There is a section entitled ERRORS in every man page of *NIX system call. Refer to the manual, for example : http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/accept.2.html. You can also use the command line man accept to view it.
In general, system calls that can take some time to compute can set -1+EINTR on signal delivery and short system calls not. For example, accept() can block your process so it can be interrupted by a signal, but setsid() is so short that it has been written to not be interrupted by signals.
signal(7) for Linux lists
accept
connect
fcntl
flock
futex
ioctl
open
read
readv
recv
recvfrom
recvmsg
send
sendmsg
sendto
wait
wait3
wait4
waitid
waitpid
write
writev
as possibly interruptible (EINTR) by no-SA_RESTART handlers and
setsockopt
accept
recv
recvfrom
recvmsg
connect
send
sendto
sendmsg
pause
sigsuspend
sigtimedwait
sigwaitinfo
epoll_wait
epoll_pwait
poll
ppoll
select
lect
msgrcv
msgsnd
semop
semtimedop
clock_nanosleep
nanosleep
read
io_getevents
sleep
as EINTR-interruptible, even by SA_RESTART handlers.
Furthermore, it lists:
setsockopt
accept
recv
recvfrom
recvmsg
connect
send
sendto
sendmsg
epoll_wait
epoll_pwait
semop
semtimedop
sigtimedwait
sigwaitinfo
read
futex
msgrcv
msgsnd
nanosleep
as EINTR-interruptible by a stopping signal + SIGCONT, and says this particular behavior is Linux-specific and not sanctioned by POSIX.1.
Apart from these, especially if the function's specification doesn't list EINTR, you shouldn't get EINTR.
If you don't trust the system to honor it, you can try bombarding a loop with your suspected system function by SIGSTOP/SIGCONT+a signal with a no-SA_RESTART no-op handler and see if you can elicit an EINTR.
I tried that with:
#include <assert.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <unistd.h>
static void chld(int Sig)
{
int status;
if(0>wait(&status))
_exit(1);
if(!WIFEXITED(status)){
//this can only interrupt an AS-safe block
assert(WIFSIGNALED(status) && WTERMSIG(status) == SIGALRM);
puts("OK");
exit(0);
} else {
switch(WEXITSTATUS(status)){
case 1: puts("FAIL"); break;
case 2: puts("EINTR"); break;
}
}
exit(0);
}
static void nop(int Sig)
{
}
int main()
{
sigset_t full;
sigfillset(&full);
sigaction(SIGCHLD, &(struct sigaction){ .sa_handler=chld, .sa_mask=full, .sa_flags=0 } , 0);
sigaction(SIGUSR1, &(struct sigaction){ .sa_handler=nop, .sa_mask=full, .sa_flags=0 } , 0);
pid_t p;
if(0>(p=fork())) { perror(0); return 1; }
if(p!=0){
//bombard it with SIGSTOP/SIGCONT/SIGUSR1
for(;;){
usleep(1); kill(p, SIGSTOP); kill(p, SIGCONT); kill(p, SIGUSR1);
}
}else{
sigaction(SIGCHLD, &(struct sigaction){ .sa_handler=SIG_DFL }, 0);
if(0>alarm(1))
return 1;
for(;;){
#if 1
/*not interruptible*/
if(0>access("/dev/null", R_OK)){
if(errno==EINTR)
return 2;
perror(0);
return 1;
}
#else
int fd;
unlink("fifo");
if(0>mkfifo("fifo",0600))
return 1;
/*interruptible*/
if(0>(fd=open("fifo", O_RDONLY|O_CREAT, 0600))){
if(errno==EINTR)
return 2;
perror(0);
return 1;
}
close(fd);
#endif
}
}
return 0;
}
and unlink and access definitely appear to be EINTR-uninterruptible (in compliance with their spec), which means an EINTR-retry loop around them would be unnecessary.

Resources