RFR: 8291569: Consider removing JNI checks for signals SIGPIPE and SIGXFSZ [v2]

[David Holmes]

On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 08:35:10 GMT, Robbin Ehn <rehn at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> David Holmes has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains two additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8291569-signals
>>  - 8291569: Consider removing JNI checks for signals SIGPIPE and SIGXFSZ
>
> Hi David, I'm a bit confused here.
> 
> Why do we bother with setting up a single handler for i.e. SIGPIPE at all then?
> `set_signal_handler(SIGPIPE);`
> 
> If the user sets a no-op signal handler for SIGPIPE, without UseSignalChaining (and dependent on AllowUserSignalHandlers), before start of VM we seem to fatal out ?
> But if the user sets a no-op signal handler for SIGPIPE after start of VM we do not care?
> 
> Isn't this a bit inconsistent?
> 
> Shouldn't we just remove SIGPIPE/SIGXFSZ completely if we actually don't care?

Thanks for looking at this @robehn . That's a good question. I don't know the answer - this is day one code from January 2000. I'll have to look further into it.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12062