Re: Dumb question: Why are exceptions such as SIGSEGV not logged

[Michael Frank <mhf@linuxmail.org>]

Thank you all for your valuable input,

I was chasing some data corruption testing swsusp. 

This simple patch met my immediate needs (against 2.4.22-rc1)

 diff -uN kernel/signal.c.orig kernel/signal.c
--- kernel/signal.c.orig        2003-08-16 22:08:57.000000000 +0800
+++ kernel/signal.c     2003-08-17 06:21:49.000000000 +0800
@@ -536,6 +536,11 @@
        int ret;


+#ifdef CONFIG_SOFTWARE_SUSPEND_DEBUG
+       if (sig == 11 || sig == 13)
+    printk("Signal: %d\n",sig);
+#endif
+
 #if DEBUG_SIG
 printk("SIG queue (%s:%d): %d ", t->comm, t->pid, sig);
 #endif


> ----------------
> 5.     Use step 4 and if the problem persists and is not secondary to a 
> rogue program/daemon get a 3.5 ft (approx. 1 meter) length of sucker rod*
> and have a chat with the user in question.

As to security concerns, I feel this being the appropriate approach ;)

Regards
Michael

-- 
Powered by linux-2.6. Compiled with gcc-2.95-3 - mature and rock solid

2.4/2.6 kernel testing: ACPI PCI interrupt routing, PCI IRQ sharing, swsusp
2.6 kernel testing:     PCMCIA yenta_socket, Suspend to RAM with ACPI S1-S3

More info on swsusp: http://sourceforge.net/projects/swsusp/