Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 02 Aug 2005 11:26:54 +0200
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
To:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   pthreads: shouldn't nanosleep() be a cancellation point ?
Message-ID:  <21362.1122974814@phk.freebsd.dk>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Since sleep() is a cancellation point, shouldn't nanosleep() be as well ?

(this would also cover usleep())

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21362.1122974814>