sigprocmask( ) blocking signals in UNIX - c

i have written a small piece of code. This code first blocks the {SIGSEGV}, then adds SIGRTMIN to the same set. So, my final signal set is, {SIGSEGV,SIGRTMIN}. Thus, if i use SIG_UNBLOCK, as per my understanding, first SIGRTMIN should be unblocked, and then again if i invoke SIG_UNBLOCK, SIGSEGV should be unblocked.
That is, 1) {SIGSEGV,SIGRTMIN} 2) SIG_UNBLOCK = unblock SIGRTMIN, 3) Again invoke SIG_UNBLOCK = unblock SIGSEGV.
I am giving the process a SIGRTMIN only, thus my second unblock should halt the process with SIGRTMIN. But it is not. Please help.
N.B: Please don't give links to answers of other questions on sigprocmask( ), i have seen them and they don't clarify my question.
enter code here
#include <signal.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
sigset_t old_set,new_set;
sigemptyset(&old_set);
sigemptyset(&new_set);
if(sigaddset(&old_set,SIGSEGV)==0)
{
printf("sigaddset successfully added for SIGSEGV\n");
}
sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,&old_set,NULL); // SIGSEGV signal is masked
kill(0,SIGSEGV);
//*****************************************************************
if(sigaddset(&new_set,SIGRTMIN)==0)
{
printf("sigaddset successfully added for SIGRTMIN\n");
}
sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,&new_set,&old_set); // SIGRTMIN signal is masked
kill(0,SIGSEGV);
//****************** Unblock one signal at a time ******************
sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK,&new_set,&old_set); // SIGRTMIN signal is unmasked
sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK,&new_set,&old_set); // SIGSEGV signal is unmasked
}
Output:
[root#dhcppc0 signals]# ./a.out
sigaddset successfully added for SIGSEGV
sigaddset successfully added for SIGRTMIN
(Note:SIGSEGV is not received even after sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK,&new_set,&old_set); a second time)

Your premise is wrong. The whole set gets blocked and unblocked with a single call of sigprocmask.
Also, normally you would create a set containing every signal you want to block, then you would attempt to block them all with sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, pointer_to_sigset);.
Your code doesn't really unblock SIGSEGV though. Here's what i would write WITHOUT error handling, because it would make the snippet unnecessarily long. Check every function
for errors though, the lists of possible errors are provided by man pages:
/* ... */
sigset_t signal_set; /* We don't need oldset in this program. You can add it,
but it's best to use different sigsets for the second
and third argument of sigprocmask. */
sigemptyset(&signal_set);
sigaddset(&signal_set, SIGSEGV);
sigaddset(&signal_set, SIGRTMIN);
/* now signal_set == {SIGSEGV, SIGRTMIN} */
sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, &signal_set, NULL): /* As i said, we don't bother with the
oldset argument. */
kill(0,SIGSEGV);
kill(0,SIGSEGV); /* SIGSEGV is not a realtime signal, so we can send it twice, but
it will be recieved just once */
sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, &signal_set, NULL); /* Again, don't bother with oldset */
/* SIGSEGV will be received here */
Of course, you might want to split blocking the signals into two operations on separate sets. The mechanism works like this: there is some set of blocked signals, which would replace oldset if you provided an oldset argument. You can add to that set with SIG_BLOCK, remove from that set with SIG_UNBLOCK, and change the whole set to your liking with SIG_SETMASK arguments of the sigprocmask function.

As kubi pointed out: Here is the modified code, problem is that, i messed up with old_set and new_set. The SIGSEGV was added in old_set, which was not unblocked, and hence i did not receive Segmentation fault (SIGSEGV signal).
Thanks to kubi.
enter code here
#include <signal.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
sigset_t old_set,new_set;
sigemptyset(&old_set);
sigemptyset(&new_set);
if(sigaddset(&old_set,SIGSEGV)==0)
{
printf("sigaddset successfully added for SIGSEGV\n");
}
sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,&new_set,&old_set); // SIGSEGV signal is masked
kill(0,SIGSEGV);
//*****************************************************************
if(sigaddset(&new_set,SIGRTMIN)==0)
{
printf("sigaddset successfully added for SIGRTMIN\n");
}
if(sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,&new_set,&old_set)==-1) // SIGRTMIN signal is masked
{
perror("sigprocmask");
}
kill(0,SIGSEGV);
//****************** Unblock all signals ******************
if(sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK,&new_set,&old_set)==-1) // SIGRTMIN signal is unmasked
{
perror("sigprocmask");
}
}

Related

signal handling in linux for c

I am trying to understand how signals work in Linux from the sample program that I found online, but it has some parts which I don't really understand.
This is my sample program:
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
void catcher(int sig) {
printf("catcher() has gained control\n");
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
struct sigaction sigact;
sigset_t sigset;
sigemptyset(&sigact.sa_mask);
sigact.sa_flags = 0;
sigact.sa_handler = catcher;
sigaction(SIGUSR1, &sigact, NULL);
printf("before first kill()\n");
kill(getpid(), SIGUSR1);
sigemptyset(&sigset);
sigaddset(&sigset, SIGUSR1);
sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &sigset, NULL);
printf("before second kill()\n");
kill(getpid(), SIGUSR1);
printf("after second kill()\n");
return 0;
}
Here is the sample output from my program:
before first kill()
catcher() has gained control
before second kill()
after second kill()
Can I know why the first line in the output is before first kill()? Why doesn't catcher() has gained control appear first?
From what I know, sa_handler consists of two types of signal, signal default and signal ignore.
How do we know which signal it will generate? Why would it trigger the function to print the catcher() has gained control if the signal ignore being generate?
Besides, what is the sa_mask function in this program? In my understanding, sa_mask will block the specified signal.
Can I know why the first line in the output is before first kill()?
Why doesn't catcher() has gained control appear first?
You installed a signal handler that catches SIGUSR1. Until SIGUSR1 is delivered to the process, normal program execution flow keeps happening. So, here:
printf("before first kill()\n");
kill(getpid(), SIGUSR1);
You only generate the signal after printing before first kill(). Why don't you expect this to appear before catcher() has gained control? In other words, when you call printf("before first kill()\n");, no signals have been raised yet, so you can only expect program execution to remain normal.
This line:
kill(getpid(), SIGUSR1);
Generates SIGUSR1. The operating system delivers the signal to the process at a convenient time. Because you installed a handler for SIGUSR1, your signal handler (catcher()) is invoked. You raise the signal after printing the first line, so it is expectable that the next line of output will come from the signal handler.
Note that printf(3) is not async-signal safe, so technically you can't call it from inside a signal handler, but it is usually ok for these toy examples.
From what I know, sa_handler consists of two types of signal, signal
default and signal ignore.
There's more to it than that. The sa_handler field of struct sigaction can have the values SIG_DFL, which corresponds to the default signal action (the default action is listed in man signal), and SIG_IGN, which means the signal is ignored (nothing happens when it is raised). But sa_handler can also be a pointer to a function that you want to be invoked every time the signal is delivered. This is what the code you showed is doing - it is saying: Hey, when SIGUSR1 is delivered, please call catcher().
How do we know which signal it will generate? Why would it trigger the
function to print the catcher() has gained control if the signal
ignore being generate?
You indicated a signal (SIGUSR1) when you called sigaction(2) to setup the handler. So, catcher() will be called when SIGUSR1 is delivered.
Besides, what is the sa_mask function in this program? In my
understanding, sa_mask will block the specified signal.
It's a signal mask that is atomically installed when the signal handler is entered, and uninstalled when the signal handler returns. By default, even if you pass it an empty mask, the signal being caught is always blocked upon entering the handler (unless the SA_NODEFER flag is set in the sa_flags field of struct sigaction). However, you might want to block other signals while the handler is executing - the way you do that is by indicating these signals in sa_mask.

c setitimer not sending signal when outside its call scope

i have the following case
void foo() {
printf("hi\n");
while(1);
}
int main(void)
{
struct sigaction temp;
temp.sa_handler = &foo;
sigfillset(&temp.sa_mask);
sigdelset(&temp.sa_mask, SIGVTALRM);
sigdelset(&temp.sa_mask, SIGINT );
sigaction(SIGVTALRM, &temp, NULL);
struct itimerval tv;
tv.it_value.tv_sec = 2; /* first time interval, seconds part */
tv.it_value.tv_usec = 0; /* first time interval, microseconds part */
tv.it_interval.tv_sec = 2; /* following time intervals, seconds part */
tv.it_interval.tv_usec = 0; /* following time intervals, microseconds part */
if (setitimer(ITIMER_VIRTUAL, &tv, NULL)){
perror(NULL);
}
while(1);
return 0;
}
all I want is that every 2 seconds foo will be called (foo actually does some other stuff other than while(1), just assume foo run takes more than 2 seconds), after 2 seconds foo is indeed called but then no other call is made untill foo returns. I tried playing with the signal masks (hence the sigfillset) but also when simply calling signal(SIGVTALRM, foo) no changes are made in the result. I also tried having the itimerval and the sigactions variables declared outside main and it didn't quite affect anything.
is the thing I'm trying to do even possible?
thanks!
reference: <http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Signals-in-Handler.html>
24.4.4 Signals Arriving While a Handler Runs
What happens if another signal arrives while your signal handler function is running?
When the handler for a particular signal is invoked, that signal is automatically blocked until the handler returns. That means that if two signals of the same kind arrive close together, the second one will be held until the first has been handled. (The handler can explicitly unblock the signal using sigprocmask, if you want to allow more signals of this type to arrive; see Process Signal Mask.)
However, your handler can still be interrupted by delivery of another kind of signal. To avoid this, you can use the sa_mask member of the action structure passed to sigaction to explicitly specify which signals should be blocked while the signal handler runs. These signals are in addition to the signal for which the handler was invoked, and any other signals that are normally blocked by the process. See Blocking for Handler.
When the handler returns, the set of blocked signals is restored to the value it had before the handler ran. So using sigprocmask inside the handler only affects what signals can arrive during the execution of the handler itself, not what signals can arrive once the handler returns.
Portability Note: Always use sigaction to establish a handler for a signal that you expect to receive asynchronously, if you want your program to work properly on System V Unix. On this system, the handling of a signal whose handler was established with signal automatically sets the signal’s action back to SIG_DFL, and the handler must re-establish itself each time it runs. This practice, while inconvenient, does work when signals cannot arrive in succession. However, if another signal can arrive right away, it may arrive before the handler can re-establish itself. Then the second signal would receive the default handling, which could terminate the process.
reference:<http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-Signal-Mask.html#Process-Signal-Mask>
24.7.3 Process Signal Mask
The collection of signals that are currently blocked is called the signal mask. Each process has its own signal mask. When you create a new process (see Creating a Process), it inherits its parent’s mask. You can block or unblock signals with total flexibility by modifying the signal mask.
The prototype for the sigprocmask function is in signal.h.
Note that you must not use sigprocmask in multi-threaded processes, because each thread has its own signal mask and there is no single process signal mask. According to POSIX, the behavior of sigprocmask in a multi-threaded process is “unspecified”. Instead, use pthread_sigmask.
Function: int sigprocmask (int how, const sigset_t *restrict set, sigset_t *restrict oldset)
Preliminary: | MT-Unsafe race:sigprocmask/bsd(SIG_UNBLOCK) | AS-Unsafe lock/hurd | AC-Unsafe lock/hurd | See POSIX Safety Concepts.
The sigprocmask function is used to examine or change the calling process’s signal mask. The how argument determines how the signal mask is changed, and must be one of the following values:
SIG_BLOCK
Block the signals in set—add them to the existing mask. In other words, the new mask is the union of the existing mask and set.
SIG_UNBLOCK
Unblock the signals in set—remove them from the existing mask.
SIG_SETMASK
Use set for the mask; ignore the previous value of the mask.
The last argument, oldset, is used to return information about the old process signal mask. If you just want to change the mask without looking at it, pass a null pointer as the oldset argument. Similarly, if you want to know what’s in the mask without changing it, pass a null pointer for set (in this case the how argument is not significant). The oldset argument is often used to remember the previous signal mask in order to restore it later. (Since the signal mask is inherited over fork and exec calls, you can’t predict what its contents are when your program starts running.)
If invoking sigprocmask causes any pending signals to be unblocked, at least one of those signals is delivered to the process before sigprocmask returns. The order in which pending signals are delivered is not specified, but you can control the order explicitly by making multiple sigprocmask calls to unblock various signals one at a time.
The sigprocmask function returns 0 if successful, and -1 to indicate an error. The following errno error conditions are defined for this function:
EINVAL
The how argument is invalid.
You can’t block the SIGKILL and SIGSTOP signals, but if the signal set includes these, sigprocmask just ignores them instead of returning an error status.
Remember, too, that blocking program error signals such as SIGFPE leads to undesirable results for signals generated by an actual program error (as opposed to signals sent with raise or kill). This is because your program may be too broken to be able to continue executing to a point where the signal is unblocked again. See Program Error Signals.
I know that this has been answered and accepted already but I made tiny changes to the OP's question as follows in accordance with my comments and had a successful result (foo being called every 2 seconds, ad infinitum)
Note that addition of the memset of the temp variable and the changing from SIGVTALRM to SIGALRM.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
void foo() {
printf("hi\n");
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
struct sigaction temp;
memset(&temp, 0, sizeof(temp));
temp.sa_handler = &foo;
sigfillset(&temp.sa_mask);
sigdelset(&temp.sa_mask, SIGALRM);
sigdelset(&temp.sa_mask, SIGINT );
sigaction(SIGALRM, &temp, NULL);
struct itimerval tv;
tv.it_value.tv_sec = 2; /* first time interval, seconds part */
tv.it_value.tv_usec = 0; /* first time interval, microseconds part */
tv.it_interval.tv_sec = 2; /* following time intervals, seconds part */
tv.it_interval.tv_usec = 0; /* following time intervals, microseconds part */
if (setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &tv, NULL)){
fprintf (stderr, "cannot start timer\n");
perror(NULL);
}
while(1) {
fprintf (stdout, "sleep 1\n");
sleep (1);
}
return 0;
}

how to use signals to print every specific time and generate keyboard interrupt?

I have the program below and I want to use signals to print the every 5 seconds, and handle keyboard interrupt like ctrl + c to terminate the process and ctrl + p to print the result.
int i=1;
while(i>0)
{
i++;
if(i%2==0)
{
printf("%d \n",i)
}
}
In my experience signal handling difficult to do reliably, prone to subtle race conditions and the like (and whoever thought EINTR was a good idea should be shot.) Then again I suppose I never really got the UNIX way of doing things.
My advise is to do as little work as humanly possible inside of the handlers themselves and to try to keep the signals masked anywhere you're not directly interested in them.
The following is my attempt at installing a SIGALRM handler and printing a message every 5 seconds:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/select.h>
// Raise a flag once the event occurs
volatile sig_atomic_t event;
void handler(int sig) { event = 1; }
int main(void) {
sigset_t mask;
// Install our alarm handler
struct sigaction action = { 0 };
action.sa_handler = handler;
sigaction(SIGALRM, &action, NULL);
// Mask out the alarm signal during normal operation to avoid races
// and having to handle EINTR everywhere
sigemptyset(&mask);
sigaddset(&mask, SIGALRM);
sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &mask, &mask);
// Here goes the main loop..
for(;;) {
// Set the alarm
alarm(5);
// Wait for the alarm to happen with the alarm signal unblocked.
// Add whatever other I/O you're waiting for here
pselect(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, &mask);
// Did we get woken up by an alarm signal?
if(event) {
event = 0;
puts("Alarm!");
}
}
}
In your specific computationally-bound case I would suggest strategically polling the event flag from the loop instead of attempting to extract and print the present number from within the signal handler.
If you decide to go the latter route then beware that you cannot rely on being able to atomically read and write the value. Instead I would suggest a double-buffering scheme placing the two most recent values in a circular buffer with a (volatile sig_atomic_t) index pointing out the right slot. Oh, and you'll have to do the I/O through manual string manipulation and write() since printf is forbidden in a signal handler. The real kicker, though, is that you won't be able to synchronize with other standard output text in any sane fashion.
In essence using multithreading with a separate calculation thread is a far superior means of achieving the same end.

Using sigaction(), c

I was doing a little reading about sigaction() (sources are from my course notes) and I'm not sure I understand this text:
The signal mask is calculated and installed only for the duration of
the signal handler.
By default, the signal “sig” is also blocked when the signal occurs.
Once an action is installed for a specific signal using sigaction,
it remains installed until another action is explicitly requested.
Does this mean that the default signal mask is restored after returning form the signal handler?
Also, do I have to re-install the handler after using it, as if I was using signal()?
Also, there's this piece of code:
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
void termination_handler(int signum) {
exit(7);
}
int main (void) {
struct sigaction new_action,old_action;
new_action.sa_handler = termination_handler;
sigemptyset(&new_action.sa_mask);
sigaddset(&new_action.sa_mask, SIGTERM);
new_action.sa_flags = 0;
sigaction(SIGINT, NULL, &old_action);
if (old_action.sa_handler != SIG_IGN) {
sigaction(SIGINT,&new_action,NULL);
}
sleep(10);
return 0;
}
So - how exactly will SIGTERM be handled? I can see that the installed handler is termination handler(), but then SIGTERM was added to the signal mask with no use of sigprocmask(). What does this mean? Thanks!
P.s. one last question: why the if statement in main()?
Let's try to understand what's happening with a modified version of your code :
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
void termination_handler(int signum)
{
printf("Hello from handler\n");
sleep(1);
}
int main (void)
{
//Structs that will describe the old action and the new action
//associated to the SIGINT signal (Ctrl+c from keyboard).
struct sigaction new_action, old_action;
//Set the handler in the new_action struct
new_action.sa_handler = termination_handler;
//Set to empty the sa_mask. It means that no signal is blocked
// while the handler run.
sigemptyset(&new_action.sa_mask);
//Block the SEGTERM signal.
// It means that while the handler run, the SIGTERM signal is ignored
sigaddset(&new_action.sa_mask, SIGTERM);
//Remove any flag from sa_flag. See documentation for flags allowed
new_action.sa_flags = 0;
//Read the old signal associated to SIGINT (keyboard, see signal(7))
sigaction(SIGINT, NULL, &old_action);
//If the old handler wasn't SIG_IGN (it's a handler that just
// "ignore" the signal)
if (old_action.sa_handler != SIG_IGN)
{
//Replace the signal handler of SIGINT with the one described by new_action
sigaction(SIGINT,&new_action,NULL);
}
while(1)
{
printf("In the loop\n");
sleep(100);
}
return 0;
}
So, if you compile it and launch it, and press Ctrl+C, then you'll have the handler message executed, and then you get back immediately out of the main's sleep. You can do it as many time as you want, and the handler message and the inloop message are still displayed.
So, you give a function, and sigaction does everything needed to hook the signal with your handler.
Now, what about sigterm? If you increase the sleep time in termination_handler, you can type something like "pkill --signal SIGTERM ./a.out" after pressing Ctrl+C. Then, what happens? Nothing! The SIGTERM signal is blocked while termination_handler is running. But once you are back in the main, now the SIGTERM will kill the application.
(Remember, while you are testing this code, you can still kill applications by sending a SIGKILL signal.)
If you want to know more, and have more fun with signals, you have the signal manual and the sigaction manual which tell a lot more. Notice that you also have the detailed description of the sigaction structure.

Handling multiple signals

I have a question about handling a signal.
Assume that if we recieve SIGINT signal, we should print "Recieved Signal". If within ten seconds the handler recieves another signal, it should print "Shutting Down" then exit with status 1.
I made my code like this:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <unistd.h>
void handler(int);
void secondhandler(int);
void alrmhandler(int);
void alrmhandler (int alrmsig)
{
alarm(0);
}
void secondhandler(int sig)
{
/* after recieving second signal prints shutting down and exit */
printf("Shutting Down\n");
exit(1);
}
void handler ( int sig )
{
/* recieve first SIGINT signal */
printf ("Recieved Signal\n");
/* handle for the alarm function */
signal(SIGALRM, alrmhandler);
/* start 10s alarm */
alarm(10);
/* catch second SIGINT signal within 10s*/
signal(SIGINT, secondhandler);
}
int main( void )
{
signal(SIGINT, handler);
printf( "Hello World!\n" );
for ( ;; )
{
/* infinite loop */
}
return 0;
}
I tried to compile it with dev c++, but it failed. Because SIGALRM undeclared(first use in this function).
Anyway, what I want to know is if this code is right. I actually kinda not sure with the alrmhandler(). should I ignore the SIGALRM?
If you are on a Windows platform, the only signals you will be able to send are : SIGABRT, SIGFPE, SIGILL, SIGINT, SIGSEGV, or SIGTERM.
You write:
what I want to know is if this code is right.
Not entirely. printf() is not async-signal-safe, and so should not be called from within a signal handler unless you are very sure it is safe to do so. It is not safe to do so within the code you provide.
The alarm() technique is, generally, race-prone. Your ten second alarm might expire in the middle of your secondhandler() function. To guard against this, you might mask out signals to compensate with a more sophisticated signal manipulation function.
There are more elegant/flexible ways of implementing the timeout you desire, but that's perhaps a question better suited for codereview.stackexchange.com.

Resources