Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:30:36 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com> Cc: FreeBSD stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pthread_cancel / sleep change in behaviour Message-ID: <20150904123036.GH2072@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <20150904163524.0b420a90@X220.alogt.com> References: <20150903080047.16be939e@X220.alogt.com> <20150903081947.GB2072@kib.kiev.ua> <20150903183353.2633a38b@X220.alogt.com> <20150903104351.GE2072@kib.kiev.ua> <20150904083740.5f3e49aa@X220.alogt.com> <20150904081857.GF2072@kib.kiev.ua> <20150904163524.0b420a90@X220.alogt.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 04:35:24PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi,. > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 11:18:57 +0300 > Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 08:37:40AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 13:43:51 +0300 > > > > > > and it works there. > > > > > > So, it is just a matter of time until the fix finds its way back to > > > 10? > > Yes, should be several days timeframe. > > this sounds perfect. > > > > > > > > Of course, I do not ignore the signal now in the application > > > anymore. The application then works as expected on 10.2 STABLE. > > Well, the consequence of the bug, which affected you, is that it was > > allowed for the applications to ignore SIGCANCEL. With the bug fixed, > > the signal(SIGCANCEL, anything) becomes nop. > > Was it just me being blind or is the documentation on this a bit > limited? Documentation on what ? SIGCANCEL is non-standard signal, it is not documented because this is internal facility for the threading library. Fiddling with anything without understanding the functionality is not the best idea.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150904123036.GH2072>