Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 17:44:42 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SIGILL @ pthread_create() after execv -FIXED- Message-ID: <414A337A.1040906@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0409162009440.26503-100000@sea.ntplx.net> References: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0409162009440.26503-100000@sea.ntplx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Daniel Eischen wrote: >On Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Julian Elischer wrote: > >Regardless, it doesn't have the signal mask that the execve()'ing thread >has, and that is the key issue. The exec'd process needs to have the >signal mask of the issuing thread. > > > >>I'd still prefer to do things that work for libthr as well as libpthread. >> >> > >I don't see why this (whatever we do) has to be any different for libthr. > > > >For libpthread, we could put ourselves in a critical region (clear >the mailbox) -- that would stop upcalls. Does that also prevent >switching to different kernel threads? > yes I guess that would be enough. > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?414A337A.1040906>