Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 18:41:59 +0300 (MSK) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.ru> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk, brian@utell.co.uk, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ppp Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970311183635.1003B-100000@nagual.ru> In-Reply-To: <199703111513.CAA17912@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 12 Mar 1997, Bruce Evans wrote: > All systems. The kernel doesn't count signals, so if ppp isn't run for > more than 1.2 seconds then it will miss some alarms. However, this probably > isn't important since it will miss much more than alarms :-). There may be > problems with closer-spaced alarms if ppp wants to count them. The big difference here is pended (delayed) and not pended signals handling. PPP code was written in assumptions that SIGALRM reaction is not delayed, so if we trust developer, he choose timeout + handler action in the way that signals not missed. If we delay signals reaction with pending, we increase probaility for signals missing and must count them to be shure. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@null.net> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.970311183635.1003B-100000>