Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/02/24/15:22:15
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 04:40:33PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Actually, I spoke too soon. I don't understand your analysis.
> You make this statement:
>>However, if the queueing of the blocked signal happens right after the
>>signal mask change, then we miss the signal.
> but I don't understand how you came to this conclusion. If the
signal > mask
> changes, then the queue should be flushed -- that's what the
__SIGFLUSH is
> for. So, even if something is added to the queue while the mask is
changing,
> the function which changes the mask should eventually call send_sig
to > cause
> the wait_sig thread to run the queue.
> So, this patch would seem to be a band-aid over some other problem.
OK, I think I see what is happening now:
set_signal_mask() does indeed call sig_dispatch_pending() to do a flush
when the signal mask changes. However, when the sigq is empty,
sig_dispatch_pending() just returns! See:
sig_dispatch_pending (bool fast)
{
-if (exit_state || &_my_tls == _sig_tls || !sigq.start.next)
+if (exit_state || &_my_tls == _sig_tls)
Unfortunately, when I make this change, everything hangs. Not sure what
the issue is there. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Paul
(please CC, I'm not on the list)
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -