playground/suckless-quark
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Releases Wiki Activity

Refactor sighandler

Browse source 
You can't handle SIGKILL. Given we have control over which
signals are passed to the sighandler, it's enough to catch SIGCHLD
and do standard behaviour than building a big switch for that.
This commit is contained in:
FRIGN 2014-08-07 17:24:39 +02:00
parent 92b8bc27da
commit a345c63a59
1 changed files with 3 additions and 12 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

15
quark.c
View file

@ -459,20 +459,12 @@ serve(int fd) {
void void
sighandler(int sig) { sighandler(int sig) {
switch(sig) { if (sig == SIGCHLD) {
default: break; while(0 < waitpid(-1, NULL, WNOHANG));
case SIGHUP: } else {
case SIGINT:
case SIGQUIT:
case SIGABRT:
case SIGTERM:
logerrmsg("received signal: %s, closing down\n", strsignal(sig)); logerrmsg("received signal: %s, closing down\n", strsignal(sig));
close(fd); close(fd);
running = 0; running = 0;
break;
case SIGCHLD:
while(0 < waitpid(-1, NULL, WNOHANG));
break;
} }
} }
@ -514,7 +506,6 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
signal(SIGQUIT, sighandler); signal(SIGQUIT, sighandler);
signal(SIGABRT, sighandler); signal(SIGABRT, sighandler);
signal(SIGTERM, sighandler); signal(SIGTERM, sighandler);
signal(SIGKILL, sighandler);
/* init */ /* init */
setbuf(stdout, NULL); /* unbuffered stdout */ setbuf(stdout, NULL); /* unbuffered stdout */