I have a thread in an application that has a loop like this:
...
while (1)
{
checkDatabase();
checkChildren();
sleep(3);
}
...
checkDatabase() is self-explanatory; checkChildren() simply calls waitpid(-1, &status, WNOHANG) to deal with child processes that have either exited or received a signal.
The application works fairly well, but it has default signal handling. The problem is that this parent process has a number of threads (don't worry about child processes for now) and I don't have any experience with synchronous signals, let alone in a POSIX threads application. I have used signal() before but apparently it's non-portable and it doesn't do what I need anyway. I have no experience at all with sigaction methods, and I can't find good documentation on how to fill in the structs and so on.
What I need to do is to synchronously catch terminating signals like SIGINT, SIGTERM and SIGQUIT in the above loop (and I need to ignore SIGPIPE altogether so that I can catch the EPIPE error from IO methods), so it would look like this:
...
while (1)
{
checkDatabase();
checkChildren();
checkForSignals();
sleep(3);
}
...
All other threads should not have anything to do with the signal; only the thread that executes this loop should be aware of it. And, obviously, it needs to be a non-blocking check so the loop doesn't block during its first iteration. The method called if a signal is found will sort out the other threads and destroy mutexes, and all that.
Could anyone please give me a heads-up? Many thanks.
(Following the question's comments, and for completeness, this solution tries to avoid signal handlers.)
It is possible to block signals from being raised through sigprocmask() (or, rather, pthread_sigmask() since you're using threads). From there on, the signals that were raised but blocked are available through sigpending().
Therefore, you could do something like (error checking omitted for brevity):
sigset_t blocked;
sigemptyset(&blocked);
sigaddset(&blocked, SIGINT);
sigaddset(&blocked, SIGTERM);
sigaddset(&blocked, SIGQUIT);
pthread_sigmask(SIG_BLOCK, &blocked, NULL); // Block SIGINT, SIGTERM and SIGQUIT.
signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN); // Ignore SIGPIPE.
Then, later:
void checkForSignals(void)
{
sigset_t pending;
sigpending(&pending);
if (sigismember(&pending, SIGINT)) {
// Handle SIGINT...
}
if (sigismember(&pending, SIGTERM)) {
// Handle SIGTERM...
}
if (sigismember(&pending, SIGQUIT)) {
// Handle SIGQUIT...
}
}
Since sigpending() does not block, this seems to match your requirements.
Create a signal handler for SIGINT, SIGTERM and SIGQUIT, using the same function. In that signal function just set a flag that can be polled in your loop.
Something like this:
/* Global variable, will be set to non-zero if SIGINT, SIGTERM or SIGQUIT is caught */
int term_signal_set = 0;
void my_signal_handler(int)
{
term_signal_set = 1;
}
/* ... */
signal(SIGINT, my_signal_handler);
signal(SIGTERM, my_signal_handler);
signal(SIGQUIT, my_signal_handler);
signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN); /* So functions return EPIPE */
while (1)
{
/* ... */
if (term_signal_set > 0)
break; /* Or do something else */
sleep(3);
}
In a multithreaded application receiving a signal, there is no predetermination, which thread receives the signal. Typical workaraounds include setting a global variable in the signal handler and checking it from a dedicated thread.
So in your case the signal handler (called from whatever thread) would just set something like a global variable for the signal received, and in CheckForSignals() you would test it.
sigaction is the way to go. man sigaction should help you. Here is an example from the web
#include <stdio.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
struct sigaction act;
void sighandler(int signum, siginfo_t *info, void *ptr)
{
printf("Received signal %d\n", signum);
printf("Signal originates from process %lu\n",
(unsigned long)info->si_pid);
}
int main()
{
printf("I am %lu\n", (unsigned long)getpid());
memset(&act, 0, sizeof(act));
act.sa_sigaction = sighandler;
act.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO;
sigaction(SIGTERM, &act, NULL);
// Waiting for CTRL+C...
sleep(100);
return 0;
}
Related
I got this issue:
I made a program in c, where the main process creates some child process, and these, after a while, are able to send a signal to the main process:
the signal is sent with this code:
kill(getppid(), SIGUSR1);
and the main process, in the while loop is waiting the SIGUSR1 message...
everything is fine, but if I increase the child number and automatically the possibility to have more signals in the same time, the program crash printing the message:
User defined signal 1
the main code is like this:
void signalHandler(int sig, siginfo_t* info, void* vp) {
if (sig == SIGUSR1) {
printf("SIGUSR1 has arrived\n");
} else if (sig == SIGUSR2) {
printf("SIGUSR2 has arrived\n");
}
}
int main(int argc, char const *argv[]) {
struct sigaction action, old_action;
memset(&action, 0, sizeof(struct sigaction));
action.sa_sigaction = signalHandler;
sigemptyset(&action.sa_mask);
action.sa_flags = SA_RESTART | SA_NODEFER;
while (1) {
sigaction(SIGUSR1, &action, &old_action);
sigaction(SIGUSR2, &action, &old_action);
}
}
I think the problem is that the signal is sent when the master is still working on the previous signal...but how can I do to fix this thing
thank you very much
It means that the child is sending the signal before the parent process was able to call sigaction() to configure the signal handler. When this happens, the default signal reaction to SIGUSR1 terminates the program:
SIGUSR1 P1990 Term User-defined signal 1
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/signal.7.html
However, there are many problems with your code. printf() is not safe to be called inside a signal handler (it's AS-Unsafe as defined by POSIX):
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799.2018edition/functions/V2_chap02.html#tag_15_04_03
Also, using SA_NODEFER may create nested signals (another signal handler is called while some signal handler is running) but your program does not protect against a flood. Given enough children this will generate a stack overflow. Finally, the main program keeps running a non-stop infinite loop reconfiguring the signals, while it should have configured them only once outside the loop and blocked inside the loop (for example sigwait() or pselect()):
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/select.2.html
Finally, if you expect to run a large number of children that might flood the parent with signals, then it would be better to use the real time signal generation function (sigqueue()) rather than kill(). The difference is that with sigqueue(), all signals are queued and SA_NODEFER is not necessary to avoid discarding signals while some other signal handler is running:
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799.2018edition/functions/V2_chap02.html#tag_15_04_02
Final conclusion: the code should be completely rewritten.
The POSIX pselect function take a signal mask argument. The signal mask is "atomically" set as the current mask before execution of the function begins, and is restored as the function returns.
This allows an otherwise masked signal to be unmasked while the function executes, and masked again when the function returns. It's guaranteed* that if a signal unmasked in this way is caught, the pselect function will be interrupted by the signal and (unless the signal action is specified with the SA_RESTART flag) will return an EINTR error.
(*: or is it? the language in the document linked above would seem to allow that a signal being received between when pselect unblocked due to seeing a file readiness or timeout and when it replaced the signal mask with the original would not necessarily cause EINTR, since EINTR is required if "The function was interrupted while blocked ..." - however, that ultimately doesn't affect this question).
My question is: supposing that two separate signals are temporarily unmasked during pselect execution, is it possible that both signals will be caught before the pselect function returns and the previous signal mask is restored - or is there some kind of guarantee that only one signal will be caught in this case (leaving the other one pending)? (For purposes of the question, suppose that SA_RESTART is not set for the signal action, and that all signals were specified to be masked during execution of the signal handler when it was established via sigaction).
I can find nothing which suggests that only one signal may be processed, but I may have missed something, and I am writing some code for which this would be a very useful guarantee. I'd be interested to know if POSIX itself makes any guarantee, and also if different OSes provide such a guarantee independently.
No, but it also doesn’t specify that multiple signals can or must. Since it is unspecified, it is best to follow the general rule, which allows all pending unmasked signals to be processed. If you attempt to strictly depend upon this, you are likely on a bad path because the timing of asynchronous events is difficult to predict.
In general, it would be very difficult to make an implementation that imposed an ‘only one' restriction because the os runtime would have to leave one or more signals pending but unmasked until some unspecified point. Remember that the signal handler which runs when pselect is interrupted could do a siglongjmp rather than returning, so the kernel would have to keep a complicated, possibly unbounded data structure to track which signal mask to enforce.
Below is a modified version of your test program. In this one, each event emits a string via write() so there are no buffering problems. The program sets its “main” environment to mask SIGUSR1, SIGUSR2; but while pselect is running, it permits SIGUSR1, SIGUSR2, SIGTERM.
The program forks, with the parent (default:) sitting in a loop invoking pselect(), then outputting ‘.’ after it completes.
The child sits in a loop, delivering SIGUSR1, SIGUSR2 to the parent, then sleeping for a bit. It outputs ‘^’ after delivering the signals.
The handler emits a prefix “(1” or “(2” for SIGUSR1, SIGUSR2 resp; then sleeps for a bit, and outputs “)” to indicate the sleep has completed.
The output I see on macos (10.12.6, but I doubt it matters much) is:
^(2)(1).^(2)(1).^(2)(1).^(2)(1).Terminated: 15
which indicates that the signal handler for each of SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2 are being run for every invocation of pselect(). This is what I would expect; as it is designed to not admit a window of uncertainty as would be the case with bracketting select() with sigprocmasks().
#include <stdio.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <sys/select.h>
#include <unistd.h>
void handle(int signo)
{
char s[2];
s[0] = '(';
s[1] = signo == SIGUSR1? '1' : '2';
write(1, s, 2);
sleep(1);
write(1, ")", 1);
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
sigset_t mask;
sigemptyset(&mask);
sigaddset(&mask, SIGUSR1);
sigaddset(&mask, SIGUSR2);
sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &mask, NULL);
sigfillset(&mask);
sigdelset(&mask, SIGUSR1);
sigdelset(&mask, SIGUSR2);
sigdelset(&mask, SIGTERM);
signal(SIGUSR1, handle);
signal(SIGUSR2, handle);
pid_t t = fork();
switch (t) {
default:
while (1) {
/* no USR1, USR2 */
pselect(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, &mask);
/* no USR1, USR2 */
write(1, ".", 1);
}
break;
case 0:
t = getppid();
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
kill(t, SIGUSR1);
kill(t, SIGUSR2);
write(1, "^", 1);
sleep(5);
}
kill(t, SIGTERM);
break;
case -1:
perror("fork\n");
}
return 0;
}
I've continued searching and found no additional information, so I can only conclude that there are no guarantees in POSIX generally.
Under Linux, if I understand the code below correctly, only one signal can be handled (assuming that the signal handler itself doesn't unmask signals): the relevant code and a revealing comment is in fs/select.c, in the do_pselect function:
ret = core_sys_select(n, inp, outp, exp, to);
ret = poll_select_copy_remaining(&end_time, tsp, 0, ret);
if (ret == -ERESTARTNOHAND) {
/*
* Don't restore the signal mask yet. Let do_signal() deliver
* the signal on the way back to userspace, before the signal
* mask is restored.
*/
if (sigmask) {
memcpy(¤t->saved_sigmask, &sigsaved,
sizeof(sigsaved));
set_restore_sigmask();
}
} else ...
It essentially returns from the system call, allowing the signal handler to execute, after which the original signal mask will immediately be restored (from current->saved_sigmask, because set_restore_sigmask() sets a flag indicating that this should occur).
The following test program verifies this:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <sys/select.h>
volatile sig_atomic_t got_usr1 = 0;
volatile sig_atomic_t got_usr2 = 0;
void handle_usr1(int signo, siginfo_t *info, void *v)
{
got_usr1 = 1;
}
void handle_usr2(int signo, siginfo_t *info, void *v)
{
got_usr2 = 1;
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
// mask SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2:
sigset_t curmask;
sigemptyset(&curmask);
sigaddset(&curmask, SIGUSR1);
sigaddset(&curmask, SIGUSR2);
sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &curmask, NULL);
// Create a mask for all but SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2:
sigset_t mask;
sigfillset(&mask);
sigdelset(&mask, SIGUSR1);
sigdelset(&mask, SIGUSR2);
// Set up signal handlers:
struct sigaction action;
action.sa_sigaction = handle_usr1;
sigfillset(&action.sa_mask);
action.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO;
sigaction(SIGUSR1, &action, NULL);
action.sa_sigaction = handle_usr2;
sigaction(SIGUSR2, &action, NULL);
// Make signals pending:
raise(SIGUSR1);
raise(SIGUSR2);
// pselect with no file descriptors and no timeout:
pselect(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, &mask);
int count = got_usr1 + got_usr2;
printf("Handled %d signals while in pselect.\n", count);
return 0;
}
On Linux, the output of the above is consistently:
Handled 1 signals while in pselect.
This also seems to be the case on FreeBSD; however, I'm not willing to count on this being the case on all other platforms. The solution I have found to ensuring that only one signal can be handled is to use siglongjmp to jump out of the signal handler as well as out of the pselect call while also restoring the signal mask so that no further signals can be processed.
Essentially, that code looks like this:
jmp_buf jbuf; // signal handlers have access to this
if (sigsetjmp(jbuf, 1) != 0) {
// We received a signal while in pselect ...
}
int r = pselect(nfds, &read_set_c, &write_set_c, &err_set, wait_ts, &sigmask);
The signal handlers must execute a siglongjmp:
void signal_handler(int signo, siginfo_t *siginfo, void *v)
{
siglongjmp(jbuf, 1);
}
This feels crufty, but seems to work on all platforms that I've tested it on (Linux, MacOS and FreeBSD) - furthermore it seems to be supported by POSIX generally.
for a homework assignment I have to use only linux system calls to manage signals in a game, programmed in C.
One thing I have to do, it's to call indefinitly sigsuspend in a thread and wait for a SIGALRM,then if there is a sigalarm (signal alarm) I have to printf() something (doesn't matter what).
However, I tried several things but it doesn't work, I don't know how to "deblock" sigsuspend and print what i want. And there is a timer in the game which send sigalrm. My code works but not the part with the sigsuspend
Of course I have also a sigarlm handler which does some stuff with SDL when it receives a sigarlm.
I don't really how I have to use masks with sigsuspend
Code :
//initialising sigaction struct
int init (void)
{
// Signal handler
sigact.sa_handler = sigalrm_handler;
sigact.sa_flags = 0;
sigemptyset(&sigact.sa_mask);
// Linked list
head = NULL;
sigaction(SIGALRM, &sigact, NULL);
pthread_create(&tid_sigrecv, NULL, (void *)deamon, NULL);
return 1; // Implementation ready ?
}
The sigsuspend part
void deamon(void * arg)
{
int sig;
while(1) {
sigset_t mask;
sigemptyset(&mask);
sigaddset(&mask, SIGALRM);
sigsuspend(&mask);
printf("in thread\n");
}
}
Currently it only does not print "in thread" when a sigarlm is received, what should I do to use sigsuspend properly ? I am obliged to use sigsuspend
You create a thread that should wait for the signal SIGALRM thanks to sigsuspend(), but instead you open the thread to all signals but SIGALRM.
Replace
sigemptyset(&mask); // clear mask
sigaddset(&mask, SIGALRM); // set mask to SIGALRM
sigsuspend(&mask); // wait for any signal but blocks SIGALRM
with
sigfillset(&mask); // mask set to all signals
sigdelset(&mask, SIGALRM); // remove SIGALRM from the mask
sigsuspend(&mask); // block all signals but SIGALRM
this way sigsuspend() waits for a non blocked signal (SIGALRM).
For testing, you could send the thread the SIGALRM signal using
pthread_kill(tid_sigrecv, SIGALRM);
from the main thread, for instance.
I have a program that needs to use one custom signal handler for SIGINT and one for SIGCHILD.
I therefore added two struct sigaction called sigchildStruct and sigintStruct, and used sigaction to define two custo signal handling functions: handleSigInt() and handleSigChild()
First of all, is this the way you are supposed to do it; needing to register two separate sigaction structs?
Second of all, i need to block SIGCHILD during part of the code execution, i only want to receive the signal at one place in the code, so i used:
sigdelset(&sigchildStruct.sa_mask,SIGCHLD);
// Catch SIGCHILD signal here
sigaddset(&sigchildStruct.sa_mask,SIGCHLD);
Is that how you would do that? More importantly: there are two sigaction structs, but do i only need to change the sa_mask on one of them, or on both? Now i only changed the sa_mask on the struct called sigchildStruct, and not on the one called sigintStruct.
The rest of the code:
void handleSigchild(int sig) {
int childPID,childExitStatus;
printf("\nSIGCHILD received\n");
while ((childPID = waitpid(-1,&childExitStatus,WNOHANG)) >0) {
if (childExitStatus==2) {printf("Background process: %d%s",childPID," terminated by SIGINT\n");}
else if (childExitStatus!=0) {printf("Background process: %d%s",childPID," unknown command\n");}
printf("Background process: %d%s\n",childPID," has exited");
}
}
void handleSigInt(int sig) {
// SIGINT will be sent to all child processes so nothing needs to be done
printf("\nSIGINT received\n");
}
int main(int argc, char ** argv) {
// Sigaction for SIGCHILD
struct sigaction sigchildStruct;
sigchildStruct.sa_handler = &handleSigchild;
sigemptyset(&sigchildStruct.sa_mask);
sigaddset(&sigchildStruct.sa_mask,SIGCHLD);
sigchildStruct.sa_flags = SA_NOCLDSTOP;
if (sigaction(SIGCHLD, &sigchildStruct, 0) == -1) {
printf("Couldnt register signal handler: %s\n",strerror(errno));
exit(1);
}
// Sigaction for SIGINT
struct sigaction sigintStruct;
sigintStruct.sa_handler = &handleSigInt;
sigemptyset(&sigintStruct.sa_mask);
sigintStruct.sa_flags = SA_RESTART;
if (sigaction(SIGINT, &sigintStruct, 0) == -1) {
printf("Couldnt register signal handler: %s\n",strerror(errno));
exit(1);
}
sigdelset(&sigchildStruct.sa_mask,SIGCHLD);
// Catch SIGCHILD signal here
sigaddset(&sigchildStruct.sa_mask,SIGCHLD);
}
Because nobody answered, I'll try to do so. When I am dealing with signals I am using the function signal. This function takes two parameters: signal code and signal handler function. To start catching the signals I would put the code:
signal(SIGINT, handleSigInt);
signal(SIGCHILD, handleSigChild);
To stop catching the signal, I would execute:
signal(SIGINT, SIG_IGN);
signal(SIGCHILD, SIG_IGN);
Hope it helps.
There is several mistakes in your code.
1) It is not necessary to add SIGCHLD signal in the set of blocked signals during its handling. Every catched signal is blocked during its handling, so that there is no concurrent reentrance in the handling function :
struct sigaction sigchildStruct;
sigchildStruct.sa_handler = &handleSigchild;
sigemptyset(&sigchildStruct.sa_mask);
// sigaddset(&sigchildStruct.sa_mask,SIGCHLD); // unnecessary
sigchildStruct.sa_flags = SA_NOCLDSTOP;
2) You modified the sa_mask value of the struct after setting the action, which has no effect. If you want to block the delivery of signals for some time you need to modify the process signal mask. There is a function to do that : sigprocmask. So you can do something like :
sigset_t oldMask, newMask;
sigemptyset(&newMask);
sigaddset(&newMask,SIGCHLD);
sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,&newMask,&oldMask);
// now protected from SIGCHLD delivery, signal will be blocked...
sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK,&oldMask,NULL);
// old protection reinstalled...
I'm trying to create a program that blocks the signal SIGUSR1 and the it unblocks the signal.
In the middle I want to see that the signal is blocked using sigpending. But it always says that the signal isn't blocked, and I can use the signal when it's supposed to be blocked.
This is the code that I have.
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <signal.h>
static void signals(int signaln)
{
switch (signaln) {
case SIGUSR1:
printf("Signal SIGUSR1\n"); break;
}
return;
}
main()
{
sigset_t set,set2;
struct sigaction sigs;
sigs.sa_handler = signals;
sigemptyset(&sigs.sa_mask);
sigs.sa_flags=SA_ONESHOT;
sigaction(SIGUSR1, &sigs,0);
sigemptyset(&set);
sigemptyset(&set2);
sigaddset(&set,SIGUSR1);
if(sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, &set, NULL)==0){
printf("Blocking SISGUSR1...\n");
}
sigpending(&set2);
if (sigismember(&set2,SIGUSR1)==1)
{
printf("The signal is blocked\n"); //it should print this
}
wait(2);
kill(getpid(),SIGUSR1); //the signal shouldn't work
wait(2);
if(sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, &set, NULL)==0){
printf("Unblocking SIGUSR1\n");
}
}
Could anyone help me?
sigpending doesn't tell you whether a signal is blocked. It tells you whether a signal is waiting to be delivered. (i.e., the signal is blocked and one has been sent.)
Also, blocked doesn't meean that the signal won't be delivered; it means that the signal won't be delivered now. So you can send the signal, and it will be delivered as soon as the signal is unblocked; probably after the call to sigprocmask(SIGUNBLOCKED...) but before the call to printf, so you'll probably see the signal received message before you see the "unblocking" message.