отправить сигнал процессу или группе процессов (send a signal to a process or a group of processes)
Пролог (Prolog)
This manual page is part of the POSIX Programmer's Manual. The
Linux implementation of this interface may differ (consult the
corresponding Linux manual page for details of Linux behavior),
or the interface may not be implemented on Linux.
Имя (Name)
kill — send a signal to a process or a group of processes
Синопсис (Synopsis)
#include <signal.h>
int kill(pid_t pid, int sig);
Описание (Description)
The kill() function shall send a signal to a process or a group
of processes specified by pid. The signal to be sent is
specified by sig and is either one from the list given in
<signal.h> or 0. If sig is 0 (the null signal), error checking is
performed but no signal is actually sent. The null signal can be
used to check the validity of pid.
For a process to have permission to send a signal to a process
designated by pid, unless the sending process has appropriate
privileges, the real or effective user ID of the sending process
shall match the real or saved set-user-ID of the receiving
process.
If pid is greater than 0, sig shall be sent to the process whose
process ID is equal to pid.
If pid is 0, sig shall be sent to all processes (excluding an
unspecified set of system processes) whose process group ID is
equal to the process group ID of the sender, and for which the
process has permission to send a signal.
If pid is -1, sig shall be sent to all processes (excluding an
unspecified set of system processes) for which the process has
permission to send that signal.
If pid is negative, but not -1, sig shall be sent to all
processes (excluding an unspecified set of system processes)
whose process group ID is equal to the absolute value of pid, and
for which the process has permission to send a signal.
If the value of pid causes sig to be generated for the sending
process, and if sig is not blocked for the calling thread and if
no other thread has sig unblocked or is waiting in a sigwait()
function for sig, either sig or at least one pending unblocked
signal shall be delivered to the sending thread before kill()
returns.
The user ID tests described above shall not be applied when
sending SIGCONT to a process that is a member of the same session
as the sending process.
An implementation that provides extended security controls may
impose further implementation-defined restrictions on the sending
of signals, including the null signal. In particular, the system
may deny the existence of some or all of the processes specified
by pid.
The kill() function is successful if the process has permission
to send sig to any of the processes specified by pid. If kill()
fails, no signal shall be sent.
Возвращаемое значение (Return value)
Upon successful completion, 0 shall be returned. Otherwise, -1
shall be returned and errno set to indicate the error.
Ошибки (Error)
The kill() function shall fail if:
EINVAL The value of the sig argument is an invalid or unsupported
signal number.
EPERM The process does not have permission to send the signal to
any receiving process.
ESRCH No process or process group can be found corresponding to
that specified by pid.
The following sections are informative.
Примеры (Examples)
None.
Использование в приложениях (Application usage)
None.
Обоснование (Rationale)
The semantics for permission checking for kill() differed between
System V and most other implementations, such as Version 7 or 4.3
BSD. The semantics chosen for this volume of POSIX.1‐2017 agree
with System V. Specifically, a set-user-ID process cannot
protect itself against signals (or at least not against SIGKILL)
unless it changes its real user ID. This choice allows the user
who starts an application to send it signals even if it changes
its effective user ID. The other semantics give more power to an
application that wants to protect itself from the user who ran
it.
Some implementations provide semantic extensions to the kill()
function when the absolute value of pid is greater than some
maximum, or otherwise special, value. Negative values are a flag
to kill(). Since most implementations return [ESRCH] in this
case, this behavior is not included in this volume of
POSIX.1‐2017, although a conforming implementation could provide
such an extension.
The unspecified processes to which a signal cannot be sent may
include the scheduler or init.
There was initially strong sentiment to specify that, if pid
specifies that a signal be sent to the calling process and that
signal is not blocked, that signal would be delivered before
kill() returns. This would permit a process to call kill() and be
guaranteed that the call never return. However, historical
implementations that provide only the signal() function make only
the weaker guarantee in this volume of POSIX.1‐2017, because they
only deliver one signal each time a process enters the kernel.
Modifications to such implementations to support the sigaction()
function generally require entry to the kernel following return
from a signal-catching function, in order to restore the signal
mask. Such modifications have the effect of satisfying the
stronger requirement, at least when sigaction() is used, but not
necessarily when signal() is used. The standard developers
considered making the stronger requirement except when signal()
is used, but felt this would be unnecessarily complex.
Implementors are encouraged to meet the stronger requirement
whenever possible. In practice, the weaker requirement is the
same, except in the rare case when two signals arrive during a
very short window. This reasoning also applies to a similar
requirement for sigprocmask().
In 4.2 BSD, the SIGCONT signal can be sent to any descendant
process regardless of user-ID security checks. This allows a job
control shell to continue a job even if processes in the job have
altered their user IDs (as in the su command). In keeping with
the addition of the concept of sessions, similar functionality is
provided by allowing the SIGCONT signal to be sent to any process
in the same session regardless of user ID security checks. This
is less restrictive than BSD in the sense that ancestor processes
(in the same session) can now be the recipient. It is more
restrictive than BSD in the sense that descendant processes that
form new sessions are now subject to the user ID checks. A
similar relaxation of security is not necessary for the other job
control signals since those signals are typically sent by the
terminal driver in recognition of special characters being typed;
the terminal driver bypasses all security checks.
In secure implementations, a process may be restricted from
sending a signal to a process having a different security label.
In order to prevent the existence or nonexistence of a process
from being used as a covert channel, such processes should appear
nonexistent to the sender; that is, [ESRCH] should be returned,
rather than [EPERM], if pid refers only to such processes.
Historical implementations varied on the result of a kill() with
pid indicating a zombie process. Some indicated success on such a
call (subject to permission checking), while others gave an error
of [ESRCH]. Since the definition of process lifetime in this
volume of POSIX.1‐2017 covers zombie processes, the [ESRCH] error
as described is inappropriate in this case and implementations
that give this error do not conform. This means that an
application cannot have a parent process check for termination of
a particular child by sending it the null signal with kill(), but
must instead use waitpid() or waitid().
There is some belief that the name kill() is misleading, since
the function is not always intended to cause process termination.
However, the name is common to all historical implementations,
and any change would be in conflict with the goal of minimal
changes to existing application code.
Будущие направления (Future directions)
None.
Смотри также (See also)
getpid(3p), raise(3p), setsid(3p), sigaction(3p), sigqueue(3p),
wait(3p)
The Base Definitions volume of POSIX.1‐2017, signal.h(0p),
sys_types.h(0p)
