Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: RE: Quick testfeedback...
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4417.0
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:52:50 +1000
Message-ID: <EA18B9FA0FE4194AA2B4CDB91F73C0EF08F164@itdomain002.itdomain.net.au>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Quick testfeedback...
Thread-Index: AcE7LWcyRQw6I8qYReqDUD9ZYduahQAAAxSg
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id WAA12152



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 12:04 PM
> To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
> Subject: Re: Quick testfeedback...
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 11:43:31AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> >This is broadcast.c:
> 
> So, if I read that correctly, sleep can be called from a thread.
> 
> I checked in a patch that should fix the 
> call_signal_handler_now SIGSEGV
> but I don't exactly understand why a signal handler was being called
> here at all.  It doesn't look like anything in broadcast.c should be
> generating a signal unless there is another 
> SIGSEGV/SIGBUS/SIGLL lurking
> elsewhere.
> 
> If that is the case, then the signal handler bug may have been masking
> another problem.  With luck, my checkin will allow us to see what the
> problem is.  Or Robert will tell me why there should have 
> been a signal
> generated in broadcast.c...

There shouldn't have been any errors from pthread, certainly not because
sleep() was called :|. I've never seen broadcast fail once the first
version was up and running...

Which is why I was so mystified and concerned about it.

Rob