Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:29:00 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_prot.c Message-ID: <20030916082900.GF43314@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030914113941.19069B-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <xzpu17fppjq.fsf@dwp.des.no> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030914113941.19069B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 11:43:32AM -0400, Robert Watson wrote: >(2) Introduce additional USR signals to be used in lieu of SIGALRM. This > also requires an application change. Actually, I'm not sure I > explicitly raised this in the thread, but it's the obvious direction: > reduce the opportunity for collision between exception signals and IPC > signals. I think this is an excellent idea. About 4 years ago, we (the FreeBSD project) wore significant pain whilst the signal space was expanded from 32 to 128 signals. In that time, precisely one additional signal has been defined. There doesn't seem to be any reason for not supporting another one or two USR signals. Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030916082900.GF43314>