Re: misc/56820: Many FPE related tests fail on softfloat machines

[David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR misc/56820; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: misc/56820: Many FPE related tests fail on softfloat machines
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 02:58:32 +0000

 On Sat, May 07, 2022 at 01:20:05PM +0000, Martin Husemann wrote:
  > From: Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost>
  > To: Rin Okuyama <rokuyama.rk%gmail.com@localhost>
  > Cc: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
  > Subject: Re: misc/56820: Many FPE related tests fail on softfloat machines
  > Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 15:19:28 +0200
  > 
  >  On Sat, May 07, 2022 at 10:16:26PM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote:
  >  > It would be nice, but doesn't it require specific system call?
  >  
  >  Or special kernel code that filters the signal mask changes? I'm not
  >  sure, just thinking out loud.
 
 I'm pretty sure the behavior if you block or ignore and then trigger
 SIGFPE is undefined, same as SIGSEGV.
 
 But if we want it to die, it seems like the best approach is in the
 place where the library posts SIGFPE, if that returns without exiting
 unblock the signal, then set it to SIG_DFL, then post it again. And
 maybe then if that returns too, whine on stderr and post SIGKILL.
 
 -- 
 David A. Holland
 dholland%netbsd.org@localhost