Re: [PATCH 0/4] linux-user: fix use of SIGRTMIN

[Josh Kunz]

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 3:55 AM Laurent Vivier <address@hidden> wrote:
> We should add signal 63 here, but it's becoming not very clean.

https://golang.org/issue/33746 has some discussion of the issue. The
Go maintainers wanted to clean this up rather than just adding 63. The
patch is on ice right now because it was unclear if QEMU was going to
add a breaking patch. Now that QEMU has this behavior, I think they
would be willing to accept it, or something similar.

> I think we could also simply ignore the error. As returning an error is
> generally an abort condition even if the signal is never used, and it's
> what we would do in go to avoid the problem. We will have problem later
> with programs that really want to use the signal but I don't think we
> can do better (do we know programs using 31 RT signals? or starting by
> the end of the list?).

My general sense is that RT signals are very rarely used, and the only
uses I can find are based off SIGRTMIN. This sounds reasonable to me.

Josh